Time Traveller Caught on 1928 Charlie Chaplin Film?

reply to post by rikgrimsby


The 1924 Siemens hearing aid has a heavy case in which the batteries are..... Handy to take with you And besides that, the thing you have to put next/in your ear is a long tube attached to a wire. The person in the premiere film is holding something which has bigger dimensions.

From the Siemens site about the 1929 hearing aid and it's development:

Better hearing with amplifying tubes

With further advancements in amplifier technology, vacuum tubes were used. These permitted high amplification, which meant a distinct improvement in the quality of sound reproduction.

The first hearing aids to fit inside a case or lady's handbag were produced in about 1934. However, these were still extremely unwieldy. (bold type font used by me)

hearing.siemens.com...

Then what is she holding? Maybe a parcel? Or something else that is thick enough to have her/his fingers wrapped around it. Why? To shield her face from the camera maybe.

Why is she talking? Maybe to the man in front or else to herself. If she went to the dentist she would have had a local anaesthesia for extraction (local anaesthesia in dentistry was already available in 1914) and it's difficult to talk when part of your mouth is anesthetized. This because some people think she is holding an ice pack after having been to the dentist. And even she didn't go to the dentist and is holding an ice pack, she's quite talkative for somebody in pain!

What we really need is someone to read her lips. ATTENTION ATS, any lip readers here?


EDIT: I tried to read her lips at the end (as far as I am concerned she is only talking when facing the camera) and I think she says: Wait for me.

It's now viral enough to have an explanatory cartoon:

www.boingboing.net...

... and a pretty funny one, at that.

Granted I haven't looked through all of the 70 plus pages so this has probably been posted. Looking at this logically what I would think is the woman is holding either her collar or a scarf to keep away chill. There could very well be a frigid light breeze that isn't blowing the nearby foilage. Looking at her clothes she is quite bundled up so that would lead one to believe it is probably fairly cold where they are. I work in the snow and your cheeks can get pretty cold in a chilly area, she is doing exactly what I would to keep the bite away. But who knows.

Upon closer inspection there does seem to be at least a breeze. On the zoomed in shots you can clearly see the leaves on the tree in the background moving slightly. When it comes to debunking unfortunatly if there is an alternate explanation and no further evidence to go on it can never be considered as fact. It would be great to believe there was a time traveler on her phone in that shot but occam's razor and all.

Originally posted by Solanum
Perhaps this "phone" is a walkie talkie and she/he is talking to someone else? That would at least work, a phone wouldn't work in 1928.

edit on 6/11/10 by Solanum because: (no reason given)

Not a Walkie Talkie per se, but something similar had been demonstrated by Nathan B. Stubblefield in the '20's or before, In 1908, U.S. Patent 887,357 was issued to him for wireless telephony, and was demonstrated by him. So if you are talking about wireless two way radio, (the spoken voice) it did exist. The hard bit is making a "connection" with wireless telephony and this piece of documentary film.

en.wikipedia.org...

More,

en.wikipedia.org...

In the last link you will see the technology was available in some European trains in 1926.

reply to post by smurfy


Before Stubblefield radio operators used keys to generate pulses like this message from a survivor of the Titanic using Marconi technology in 1911.

"TALK TO NO ONE X WILL PAY TOP PRICE FOR YOUR STORY AR"

Here is another good link describing the Stubblefield voice technology.

smart90.com...

The antennae coils were huge and the voice quality was poor before 1910 not sure how this 1928 portable handset worked or if there was anything more than "fur" in that coat.

Yeah I agree with most of the comments. The idea that a time-traveller using a cell-phone back in 1928 is ludacruos since there would be no net to connect the call. A walkie-talkie maybe? Don't know if those were invented back then.

What we see in any one moment is only half of the story. What we do not see is the other half. In this case, my modern eyes tell me she is walking down the street talking on a cell phone. I see it every day. However, the two obvious things missing are big. First, if he/she (looks like a he to me) could time travel I would think that a bluetooth (or some other small) hearing device would be necessary to prevent undo attention. Secondly, where is the undo attention? It is 1928 and there is a very "handsome" woman walking down the street in L.A. holding a "futuristic" communication device to his/her head and talking to it. Hard to imagine this not drawing a crowd.

Ok, if that was a time traveller wouldn't they be a bit more inconspicuous than that?
I know if I was a time traveller I wouldn't go walking around in 1928 talking on a mobile phone, especially in front of cameras.

I'm not sure if this has been posted already (cuz it's such a long thread now), but here is a link to 2 possible explanations:

L INK TO VIDEO EXPLANATION

wouldnt it make sense that if this was a time traveller that he/she might be on more movies ?
just a thought.......

I am only to page 3 of this, so please forgive me if someone else has already offered this explanation...


Could it be that it is just Charlie Chaplain in drag?

Maybe hiding his mouth as he, the Director, gives direction on the set?

I thought I would dress in baggy pants, big shoes, a cane and a derby hat. everything a contradiction: the pants baggy, the coat tight, the hat small and the shoes large.
Charlie Chaplin

I remain just one thing, and one thing only, and that is a clown. It places me on a far higher plane than any politician.
Charlie Chaplin

Failure is unimportant. It takes courage to make a fool of yourself.
Charlie Chaplin

A day without laughter is a day wasted.
Charlie Chaplin

BrainyQuote - Charlie Chaplain

ETA: Upon watching the film again, I noticed the "woman's" footfalls match exactly with the gentleman's "she" is following. Very comedic intent, I think.

reply to post by Dogdish
It could be Charlie getting in on the scene...but this is documentary, not a Chaplin movie. It's about the premiere day of Chaplin's movie "The circus" Notice the poster. No big feet either, just wrong viewing format.

Here is my opinion.

If it's an hearing aid device, it's unlikely for a person to hold that position, while walking, for that amount of time without being in a company of someone else. Unless just got the device and he/she's testing it. Even still I believe that any device of that time would require a little bit more attention, no distractions/no walking, and (if electronic) would produce a certain amount of noise if not focused on a sound source, which would be unpleasant, unless there's loud background music.

I would say the person in question is a women due to body language. She is walking in an uncomfortable and rushed way. Notice the spacing of the steps and the amount weight is put into the front feet. Looks almost she's walking in pain or is overweighted, but definitely is in a hurry, why?. So why she stops and looks around? Doesn't seem to me to be because of the cameras otherwise she would glance straight into the camera, saying that, was that a random reaction or a reaction from a possible conversation?

She's definitely communicating. Definitely no cellphone, no tower. If is a time travel would use a different smaller device, or is a dumb time traveler or is a time traveler with the goal to be seen and recorded in one of the oldest famous films that would last enough time..

If its be a state of art (for that time) communication device (spy, military, etc) it would be used in extremely safe conditions. Not during some shootings during the day..

m.

The woman with the "cell phone" is odd, but what about the guy in front of her? Is he wearing a mask? That is not a real face ...

Originally posted by 1Veritas
Granted I haven't looked through all of the 70 plus pages so this has probably been posted. Looking at this logically what I would think is the woman is holding either her collar or a scarf to keep away chill. There could very well be a frigid light breeze that isn't blowing the nearby foilage. Looking at her clothes she is quite bundled up so that would lead one to believe it is probably fairly cold where they are. I work in the snow and your cheeks can get pretty cold in a chilly area, she is doing exactly what I would to keep the bite away. But who knows.

Upon closer inspection there does seem to be at least a breeze. On the zoomed in shots you can clearly see the leaves on the tree in the background moving slightly. When it comes to debunking unfortunatly if there is an alternate explanation and no further evidence to go on it can never be considered as fact. It would be great to believe there was a time traveler on her phone in that shot but occam's razor and all.

edit on 10-11-2010 by 1Veritas because: (no reason given)

It was shot in southern California in the heart of Hollywood. The heavy clothing is unusual for any season.

You know you read ATS entirely too much..when you are confronted by a possible time traveler talking on a cell phone..and you debunk the theory by stating...there were no cell towers in 1928!

I guess debunking the time travel part is a little more complicated though..

She really does appear to be talking on a cell phone.

Very very interesting.

The people walking through the scene are most likely "extras" or actors directed to walk and do whatever they are doing. Movie sets don't just let Dr. Who or his associate walk through a scene. It would be rare even going that far back to have an open or uncontrolled set to allow such an occurrence. Chaplin films were big budget productions, they wouldn't leave for chance of an uncontrolled set.

Originally posted by BoatRock1
The people walking through the scene are most likely "extras" or actors directed to walk and do whatever they are doing. Movie sets don't just let Dr. Who or his associate walk through a scene. It would be rare even going that far back to have an open or uncontrolled set to allow such an occurrence. Chaplin films were big budget productions, they wouldn't leave for chance of an uncontrolled set.

Gasp! it's not a piggin' movie, it's a documentary!