The Good, The Bad and The Critic

Established on March 19th, 2012 and pioneered by film fanatic Michael J. Carlisle. The Good, The Bad and The Critic will analyze classic and contemporary films from all corners of the globe. This title references Sergei Leone's influential spaghetti western The Good, The Bad and the Ugly.
Showing posts with label Chaplin. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Chaplin. Show all posts

Tuesday, December 17, 2013

Modern Times Mega Review- By Michael Carlisle



 Title: Modern Times
Year: 1936
Director: Charles Chaplin
Country: US
Language: English

As of Dec 17th, 2013 I have seen Charles Chaplin's Modern Times  at least ten times and find myself finding something new to enjoy with every experience. I bought the Criterion Collection edition quite some time ago and find myself having the urge to write about it every so often. Though this review is quite long, I assure you it is worth the time and effort to read. This will not be my last analysis on the picture, or of Chaplin's life, I intend to keep adding to it until I've said all that can be said about this magnificent treasure. 

Just a brief introduction to the plot of Modern Times, it stars Charles Chaplin as his beloved character The Tramp. In this he struggles to live in modern industrial society with the help of a young homeless woman (Paulette Godard) .

In the early part of the twentieth century Chaplin built an empire of a career in silent cinema. He created his own character, The Tramp, a purely silent character that could not exist in a world of sound.  This wasn’t a problem for most of his life until 1927 and the Warner Brothers film that changed everything came along. The Jazz Singer became an international sensation, though it wasn’t 100% talkie, it still left audiences around the world in awe with the first ever recorded dialogue seen on the silver screen. 

The Jazz Singer took Hollywood by storm and created an intense demand by the public for films that were all talkie.  Many major studios rushed their newly created talkies into theatres, hoping that the trend would make them quick cash. Unfortunately many studios were unable to get the sound equipment to work properly and as a result many pictures released during the early period of sound were complete garbage and ultimately forgotten about over-time. Stanley Donen and Gene Kelly’s 1952 musical classic Singin’ in the Rain made fun of this period.

Early sound films suffered from many technical drawbacks; in addition to the limited movement, cameras at the time were extremely noisy and were interfering with shooting, there were difficulties syncing the actors’ mouths to the dialogue, and the demand for screenwriters to write an enormous amount of dialogue, at least compared to the silent period, was high & created a lot of stress. Many actors could not make the jump; some stars, like the German Emil Jannings found that their accent was too difficult to overcome and would not be successful with an American audience.  The demand to do a tremendous amount of voice coaching was too much for some to bear. D.W Griffith’s lead lady Lilian Gish decided she would rather take a decade off to do theater instead.

The ultimate antithesis to sound film was Charlie Chaplin himself. He was too rich and powerful to succumb to the public’s demand, go broke from not supporting the system and/or fade into obscurity, even despite the stock market crash of 1929. During that year Chaplin stated that “Talkies are ruining the great beauty of silence. They are defeating the meaning of the screen.” He also thought that talkies were too limiting, with sound the tramp could only be seen in the US, with silence the tramp could be seen across the world entire. Silent pictures had no borders or language barriers, they were accessible to all people because movement and facial expression was universal.

In 1931 Chaplin would stay true to his word, creating a dialogue-free City Lights, a film about a blind flower girl who mistakes the Tramp for an incredibly wealthy man. It is no coincidence that at the very beginning of the film, the “words” that come out of the rich people’s mouths are incoherent babbling. Throughout his career Chaplin always compared the bourgeoisie with oppression, now he was comparing sound film to oppression. The evils of the labour market in his capitalistic society have created an inferior product know as sound cinema, and now seek to destroy the silence Chaplin loved. The Tramp, of course, will not stand for such injustice.

By the mid-1930s Chaplin’s political opinions were well known to the public, thus they became essential to his image as a star. During his world tour, in which he had visited pretty much all of Europe, China and Bali, incredibly famous and influential men willingly met with Chaplin to discuss world politics. This was not a shock to Chaplin as he had always been adored by great thinkers, often being the host to luxurious and decadent parties. While he was relentlessly pursued by great thinkers, he was also stalked by a foreboding presence, the American Federal Bureau of Investigation. The FBI had a file on him since 1919 and was waiting for him to slip up. Though Chaplin’s political views were not that controversial, at worst they could be considered “Marxist”, he didn’t really like to tell people about which party he belonged to, in retrospect that may have been the best thing for him to do as he was denied re-entry in 1952 because the FBI said they had a “pretty good case against him”.
 
While Chaplin was on his world tour it seemed like an incredible amount of history was happening around him. Back in America the depression which began in 1929 with the collapse of the Stock Market was getting worse and reaching farther corners of the globe, Hitler and his Nazi regime were gaining great influence over the lives of the German people, and Gandhi’s civil disobedience was driving England mad. Chaplin was learning more about the world’s suffering, thinking more about real socio-economic issues and reconsidering his views. Of course, it wasn’t until his meeting with Gandhi did his political mind get a real intellectual boost and perhaps change the course of Chaplin’s entire life.
 

On September 22nd, 1930 the world famous Comedian named Chaplin met with the considerably more famous Mahatma Gandhi in a poor neighborhood in London. Chaplin initially remarked to Gandhi, “I should like to know why you’re opposed to machinery. After all, it’s the natural outcome of man’s genius and is part of his evolutionary process.” Gandhi would disagree, stating that, “I wish to make our people independent of industry, which is the weapon the Western world holds over us.” Though Chaplin refused to agree with Gandhi at the time, the conversation with the Mahatma stuck with him and he would reflect on it for the rest of his life. His next film Modern Times (1936) would be a clear sign that Gandhi's words had given him a new outlook on life, as the entire film is a bold cry against authority and the machinery that had ruined the lives of many men.
 

By the time he came to prepare Modern Times it seemed like Chaplin had changed his mind about the use of sound. In the Chaplin Archives there is a script which features dialogue for every scene in the film. The dialogue he had considered for his own character was nonsensical and humorous; however after a day of rehearsal Chaplin was dissatisfied about the results. Though the majority of the dialogue would be cut. Chaplin did proceed with sound effects and took great personal interest in their creation. For a scene involving flatulence, he enjoyed found a way to create the sound by blowing bubbles from a straw into a pail of water. The very fact that he was willing to experiment with sound showed an interesting evolution regarding his willingness to use newer technology. 

While Modern Times is mostly silent, there are very brief sequences of human sound. It is very interesting that the first words heard in a Chaplin film should come from the greedy and powerful boss of the factory where The Tramp works. “Quit stalling, get back to work!” Right from the start we get a sense of the power of sound and the downside of it. The fact that this sound, and many other authoritative sounds in this film is amplified by use of technology also shows Chaplin’s disgust for modern technology itself. 

The vile boss of the factory is obviously based on American industrialist Henry Ford (1863-1947) founder of the Ford Motor Company which created automobiles that the average American could afford to buy. He also had perfected the development of the assembly line and made it acceptable for many other companies to use it similarly. It was actually when Chaplin visited a Ford factory and met the dictator himself that his previous conversation with Gandhi rang true. In these factories men were treated poorly, they were worked like machines and were expected to work a continuously fast pace over long hours or be replaced by somebody who could work even harder. The Tramp’s nervous breakdown in the beginning of the film is not a scene of fiction, many factory workers of that era experienced similar emotional and physical breakdowns due to the extreme stresses that were present in the sinister factories.

Indeed this film is a true testament to Chaplin's ability to be both comedic and serious at the same time. He is a mature clown with a VERY important statement to make. Chaplin uses his film, like he has used many of his films, as a social critique.. This social critique is against technology and how it dehumanizes people. It is a powerful statement against both the rules and systems in place that prevent human progress. One has to wonder if this film was a statement regarding the advent of sound as well.  

The theme of Modern Times, which is essentially about the oppression of the individual by the industrial complex, can be simplified as the use of the individual for something other than what he/she has intended. Chaplin has a variety of jobs, none of which he can stand, but all of which he performs rather well. It’s rather interesting that every frustration in The Tramp’s life is caused by the workplace and other institutions. These institutions are supposedly created to help and satisfy, at least provide money for a decent meal. However, Tramp’s jobs seem to last less than a day, his job as a mechanic lasts precisely half a day. When his job is over he seems to accidently land himself in jail. 

When The Tramp is not working like a machine, he finds himself incarcerated. To be idle in a working society seems like impossibility, as if it’s against the law or as if idleness must take place in an institutional setting like a jail. An irony f this film is that even though idleness is discouraged, it seems like the workplace encourages it despite being created in order to enforce work ethic.
 
The world of Modern Times is unfortunately quite topsy turvy. It is where honesty is punished and dishonesty is rewarded. One example of this is early in the film when Tramp picks up a flag that has dropped on the ground; he picks it up and tries to give it back, but unwillingly becomes part of a protest that is violently interrupted by police. He is immediately arrested as a conspirator. The way Chaplin portrayed the police’s ferocity toward the protesters was not an invention of his own, this what was actually happening to protesters in the 30’s. An example of dishonesty being rewarded is seen during every successful acquisition of food. It’s as if basic survival was dependent on breaking the law and thus creating freedom from institutions.

The film shows Chaplin's strong dislike for the "system" Chaplin gets arrested three separate times in this film, sadly his life in jail is actually better than his life outside, where he constantly has to look for a job and listen to the dumb demands of his overbearing bosses .In the jail he is at least treated like a human being, instead of a number. The "criminals" of this film are easily sympathized with, since all they are doing is either stealing because they are hungry or protesting because they are job-less. However, the ending has a rather optimistic feel. You can succeed, but not if you are one of the sheep. Rebel against the system and don't be turned into a wage slave. Through great struggle there will be great triumph, as Chaplin and his lover walk off into the sunset, happy as they walk down the road to opportunity away from technology and the silliness of society's "rules".
              
 Modern Times would not be the last film which took place in a backwards world; Chaplin would soon turn his attention to the Nazi Regime which was slowly conquering Europe with great force. This doesn’t seem like a shocking move as he had strong hatred for authoritarian government in general ,  mostly because it was very dehumanizing, like the machines of Modern Times. His public statements made it clear that this was not simple publicity game; he hated fascism with a passion.

In some sense, Chaplin was completely right about technology being the end of civilization as we know it. If sound didn't advance as much as it did in the 30's, Adolf Hitler wouldn't be able to make such influential propaganda films. Triumph of the Will wouldn't have included Hitler's impassioned speeches & thus wouldn't be very effective. Hitler used sound technology to his advantage and as a result he brought the world to its knees. Luckily Chaplin eventually realized that he needed to fight sound with sound, and he made one of the most passionate speeches in all of film history with The Great Dictator.

 In conclusion, Charlie Chaplin's Modern Times is arguably more relevant now than it was when it was first shown in theaters. While technology can help mankind, it has assisted in restoring Chaplin's pictures and making them available to the public, it also has the ability to hurt mankind. More and more jobs are being taken over by technology and he advancement of technology has allowed more jobs to be located overseas, where people are willing to work like machines for low pay because there are fewer laws in place to help the average worker and it's better than nothing. The struggle to be human in the technological age is increasing at a rapid rate. Hopefully we can eventually get a hold of technology, before technology gets a hold of us. 

Praise it! 5/5

Wednesday, December 11, 2013

Shoulder Arms Review- By Michael Carlisle

Title: Shoulder Arms
Year: 1918

Director: Charles Chaplin
Country: US
Language: English


When Charles Chaplin created his iconic character,The Tramp, in 1914 during a Keystone Film Company picture called Kid Auto Races at Venice, he had no idea that it would create an enormous amount of controversy throughout his career. Though at the time his political beliefs were faint, he eventually evolved into a political figure. Slowly his films would dissect society & in 1940 he would attempt to take down the Nazi Regime himself with The Great Dictator. However before he made his World War Two picture, his comedic answer to World War One had already been seen worldwide.

In Shoulder Arms, The Tramp is a boot camp private who has a dream of being a hero and goes on a daring mission behind enemy lines in hopes of becoming one. There's just one problem; it's World War One, one of the deadliest wars in the history of mankind.

Many in Hollywood were nervous about the fact that one of their most famous peers was going to tackle the subject of WWI, at the time called the "war to end all wars". The returning soldiers, who were mortified by the horrors they saw in the trenches, knew that the war was no laughing matter. It significantly altered the mood of the world entire, but Chaplin knew of no boundaries. If he could make a comedy out of the tragic life of an immigrant in The Immigrant (1917) why would he think he was incapable of making a comedy out of another tragedy? This is an impressive achievement, though technically a propaganda picture, it's also a seamless blend of humor, wit, suspense and social commentary packed within an 36 minute running time.

Chaplin's war comedy specializes in surreal and and exaggerated set pieces which act as a demonstration of impressive creativity and masterful composition.  In one scene, the soldier dresses up as a tree and actually fools the German soldiers, knocking them out with his big branch arms whenever they get too close. Chaplin hits the perfect balance between humor and substance, helping us to sympathize with those who bore the burdens of the war, without ever becoming too sentimental. Unfortunately Shoulder Arms hit American theaters after the waring countries reached Armistice, so it could not help boost war morale, but it did assist in healing the emotional wounds of returning soldiers. 

In conclusion, Shoulder Arms is a remarkable picture that will continue to be enjoyed centuries from now. The gags are timeless and overall the amplify the folly of going to war. Unfortunately Britain wasn't too happy with Chaplin making this picture in America, when he could have been assisting with his home country, but they eventually forgave him. Praise it! 5/5

Wednesday, May 29, 2013

The Kid Review- By Michael Carlisle

 Title: The Kid
Year: 1921
Director: Charles Chaplin
Country: US
Language: English

Along with Harold Lloyd and Buster Keaton, Charles Chaplin was a master of comedy and an absolute genius at his craft. Chaplin began his comedy career in Vaudeville, then set out to work for the self proclaimed "King of Comedy" Mark Sennet at The Keystone Film Company in 1913. However, eventually he began to dislike the fact that he was making simplistic comedies with no real value, thus leaving the company and becoming his own director. He mostly made intelligent yet funny shorts until 1921, where he would embark on his first feature length film known as The Kid.

The opening title of the film reads: "A comedy with a smile--and perhaps a tear". As a woman named Edna leaves the charity hospital and passes a church wedding, Edna deposits her new baby with a pleading note in a limousine and goes off to commit suicide. The limo is stolen by thieves who dump the baby by a garbage can. Charlie the Tramp finds the baby and makes a home for him. Five years later Edna has become an opera star but does charity work for slum youngsters in hope of finding her boy.

Many regard The Kid as Chaplin's first silent masterpiece. It is an emotionally powerful tearjerker with a lot of heart; a comedic film with a substantial amount of drama. Chaplin transcends the simplistic notion of what early 1920's comedy should be and takes it higher than any thought possible. It's quite groundbreaking in that sense, surely Chaplin should be thanked for the more emotionally complex comedies that we have seen throughout time

The Kid is an intense mixture of all the right ingredients to make a silent film star. Like always his gags are of perfection, even the most difficult of scenes can look quite fluid and natural. Though the parent-child relationship has proved sentimental in film, few formulas are as emotional as Chaplin's; the scene where the child is taken away from Chaplin is devastatingly powerful. Child actor Jackie Coogan greatly impresses me, usually you don't get such fantastic acting from child actors, but he helped in making the film a believable success.

In conclusion, though the films is imperfect, portraying the kid's mother as a Christ-like figure seems a bit silly & at times the story can be too melodramatic, overall it is a very important and entertaining film that stands the test of time. There are very few films that will stir your soul as much as this one does. Praise it! 4.5/5

Sunday, April 7, 2013

The Idle Class Review- By Michael Carlisle

Title: The Idle Class 
Year: 1921
Director: Charles Chaplin
Country: US
Language: English
 

In 1921 director Charles Chaplin was still a fresh film comedian who had a lot more to accomplish. He had acclaim, wealth and an incredible amount of potential. Though he wasn't at his political peak, which would come after the end of the silent period, he still had completed several important political films like Shoulder Arms (1918), The Immigrant (1917) and  The Pilgrim (1922). The Idle Class would arguably be the funniest of Chaplin's early works.

The plot here is between Charlie the wealthy and alcoholic husband and Charlie the Tramp: the idle rich and the idle poor. In the opening scene wealthy Edna descends from a Pullman car while the Tramp crawls out from under another one. At a fancy masquerade ball Edna's husband appears as a knight whose visor is stuck closed. The Tramp shows up, running from the law, and is mistaken for the husband. Edna finds the new "husband" more to her liking than the real on.

The Idle Class is incredibly important to the history of cinema because it is the inspiration for Chaplin's much more renowned film The Great Dictator (1940) That time Chaplin's theme of mistaken identity was used to mock the most feared dictator on the planet: Adolf Hitler. While Chaplin's social commentary isn't as brazen in The Idle Class, it certainly is remarkably intelligent. I wouldn't necessarily say that the film is an exploration of the gap between the rich and the poor, but an insight into romance. Charlie the wealthy is too busy getting drunk to notice his wife, Charlie the Tramp is too busy playing gold. Neither are detestable characters, but both are idle in regards to love and romance.

 Chaplin's film is clever and brilliantly constructed, each gag is handled with delicate care and perfection. Chaplin's "economy of expression" in this film shows his true genius. Using few title cards he creates a somewhat complicated story that is easy to follow and enjoy, this would be incredibly difficult for any other Director at that time. In The Idle Class Chaplin explores what he knows best, the absurdity of human behavior and the deflation of human ego.

In conclusion, The Idle Class is a timeless Chaplin short that will leave you in stitches from laughing so hard. It has great historical importance, as well as cinematic importance. If any film-maker wishes to learn how to make a comedic film, then this is definitely the place to start. Chaplin's comedic timing is absolutely perfect. Praise it! 5/5

Friday, April 5, 2013

Limelight Review- By Michael Carlisle

 Title: Limelight
Year: 1952
Director: Charles Chaplin
Country: US
Language: English


By the time 1952 had rolled along, the legendary comedic filmmaker Charles Chaplin had made a career out of political comedies that won over the hearts of audiences worldwide. Though he had killed his beloved character The Tramp over a decade earlier in The Great Dictator, he proved with Monsieur Verdoux (1947) that he did not necessarily need the character in order to make a competent picture. Limelight would be Chaplin's first motion picture in the "leave it to beaver" era of the 50's.

Chaplin's final American film is a somewhat autobiographical film which tells the story of a fading music hall comedian's effort to help a despondent ballet dancer learn both to walk and feel confident about life again.

Why was Limelight Chaplin's last American film? Because on September 19th, 1952 his long career was dealt a heavy blow by the House Un-American Activities Committee who blacklisted him for refusing to co-operate with the FBI and possibly being a communist. All of Chaplin's sentimental political film worked against his favor as they had a 2,000+ page file on him, fortunately this would not signal the end of his career.

Limelight is an incredibly moving autobiographical picture that is both a bittersweet melodrama and a mirror into the soul of its director. It is a great drama, with many comedic moments. Like Chaplin, his character Calvero knows how to make people laugh, but feels he has lost the ability to do so. He realizes he is at the end of his career, but he still hungers for one final moment in the limelight. It's philosophical yet can be preachy at times, however it does contain a lot of Chaplin's love for humanity and his desire for a loving world.

In conclusion, while Limelight is far from the type of film Chaplin became famous for, it is still pretty meaningful and entertaining. Perhaps the biggest problem with this film is that it can be too dramatic, Claire Boom tends to over-act and thus it makes her character a tad unlike-able. To counter this, the brilliant silent star Buster Keaton makes a coma-inducing cameo that one will not forget. Praise it! 4/5

Monday, March 18, 2013

Monsieur Verdoux Review- By Michael Carlisle

Title: Monsieur Verdoux
Year: 1947
Director: Charles Chaplin
Country: U.S
Language: English

By the time 1947 had rolled along, the great comedic filmmaker Charles Chaplin had made a career out of making sentimental yet political comedies starring his beloved character The Tramp. Unfortunately Chaplin killed The Tramp in 1940 with his first feature length "talkie" The Great Dictator, which was a loud cry against fascism. However this would not be the end of Chaplin's career, he still had more great films like Monsieur Verdoux up his sleeve.

Chaplin stars as Henri Verdoux, a suave yet cynical man who plans to support his family by marrying and murdering rich women for their money. However the job isn't foolproof, Verdoux does run into some problems.

Chaplin's film is a great example of a genre known as "black comedy", which attained great popularity during the decade after World War Two. It was released in 1947, just before the anti-communist Committee was able to kick him out of America. The character of Henri Verdoux is essentially The Tramp, if The Tramp was a complete asshole. Though it's a bit difficult to completely hate the character, as his "business" is solely to feed his family. Perhaps the system is at fault, perhaps the character is as well, Chaplin's film is not black and white in moral, which makes it all the more thought provoking.

Like all Chaplin's films, the comedic and suspenseful timing of this film is perfect. Of course it is also deeply political. Chaplin's character portrayed a small scale version of what is happening throughout the world; people are not treated as human beings but merely for economic gain, for power and for exploitation. Instead of this Chaplin suggests that people need to care more about each other and about what's going on in their world, and put their attention on really important matters. It's strange that the newspaper headlines are of his evil and not the rest of the world's, Chaplin is also making a statement about how poorly the media is doing in portraying important news.

In conclusion, Monsieur Verdoux is a very funny, yet very political Chaplin film. Though it as not as well known as Modern Times or Great Dictator, it certainly is as entertaining. It's a black comedy that matches the tone of the  renowned Ealing Comedies in the UK, though I'd argue that there is much more to learn from this film. Praise it! 4/5

Tuesday, March 12, 2013

Chaplin: The Political Tramp Essay- By Michael Carlisle


Chaplin: The Political Tramp
Written By: Michael Carlisle
 
Motion-picture comedy began with a simple comic situation, in the Lumiére Brothers’ L’Arroseur arrosé (Watering the Gardener, 1895) in which a young boy steps on a garden hose as a gardener waters a lawn, cutting off the water, only to step off just as the gardener looks into the nozzle with incredible curiosity and thus is sprayed with the water that is restored.

The silver screen had shared many laughs by the time Charles Spencer Chaplin had acted in his first comedy. In Europe, a great French company known as Pathé Frères made comedic films as early as 1896. As hard as it is to believe today, Chaplin was not the first comic star of the cinema. In France a man known as Max Linder, made films for Pathé   as early as 1905 and became Cinema’s first international star. The distinction of being the first American comic film star goes the pudgy and cheerful John Bunny, who had made a variety of popular films for the Vitagraph Company from 1910 to 1915.

The most successful producer of American comedies, and the company responsible for making Charles Spencer Chaplin a star, was The Keystone Film Company (1912- 1935). Founded in Edendale, California in 1912, it was run by Mark Sennet who was consistently billed as “The King of Comedy” throughout his lifetime.

When Chaplin joined Keystone in December 1913, the company was producing twelve one-reel comedies plus one two-reel comedy a month. The comedies also were simple, but joyful. Often the fast pacing of comedic slapstick gags would have more importance placed upon them than developing characters or creating riveting plots.

Chaplin personally disliked the fact that he was making simplistic comedies. He hated the chase because it scatters the personality and thus the audience doesn’t really have anybody to connect with in the film. This created great conflict between Chaplin and his director Henry Lehrman. Chaplin desired to be in slower paced films that had loads of character development, whereas Lehrman could care less.  Due to his past theater work, he was also confused to why the film was shot out of narrative order. Unfortunately regardless of Chaplin’s disgust, he had felt his first film was butchered during the editing process, Making a Living was well acclaimed when it was first released in February, 1914.

The second film Chaplin starred in, and perhaps the most important in his Keystone career was called Mabel’s Strange Predicament, it was the first film in which Chaplin would dress in his now iconic Tramp costume.  This particular costume was an inspiring mixture consisting of a derby hat, toothbrush moustache, bamboo walking stick, baggy trousers, tight cutaway coat, and oversized boots.  These boots would be extremely helpful to Chaplin’s comedic routine, because they gave him his legendary penguin-like walk. His costume was influenced by tramp comedians of the British music hall as well as real-life tramps Chaplin had encountered in his impoverished childhood. He knew that a distinctive costume which would foster immediate recognition was traditionally a necessary part of the success of a circus clown or music-hall comedian, so therefore his costume would need to raise eyebrows. Inspired by the laughs he received from his peers regarding his funny costume, he explained the dubious character to Company founder Mark Sennet, “You know this fellow is many-sided, a tramp, a gentleman, a poet, a dreamer, a lonely fellow, always hopeful of romance and adventure. He would have you believe he is a scientist, a musician, a duke, and a polo-player. However, he is not above picking up cigarette-butts or robbing a baby of its candy.”

Of course the Character known as “The Tramp” would be introduced in Chaplin’s third film for Keystone, known as Kid Auto Races at Venice. It was a film with a rather simple plot, Chaplin makes a nuisance of himself at the Auto Races while film-makers try to film the event. It is not exactly known as “great”, but rather “important”. Kid Auto Races is the first record of an audience’s reaction to the character. As The Tramp acts silly, the audience, a number of real spectators, smile, laugh and even hold their bellies in sheer delight. Some people, like Pulitzer Prize-winning critic and author Walter Kerr, suggest that this was the beginning of a new comedic revolution. If Keystone wouldn’t become character driven themselves, then Chaplin would have to inject character into his films himself. His comedy would be more polished and refined yet remarkably spontaneous.

In less than a month of seeing The Tramp on screen, the mainstream public would embrace him. Keystone would also receive an outstanding amount of orders for films featuring Charles Spencer Chaplin and his newly created character. Chaplin would become incredibly popular, though not a household name yet, he was at least able to have creative control over his films and thus make the character driven films he wanted to make. An extraordinary aspect to Chaplin’s popularity was the he became popular without the use of radio, television, or internet to publicize or advertise the Tramp. Many exhibitors simply cut out a cardboard figure of the Tramp and placed it outside the cinema with the phrase “I am here to-day”.

It is not difficult to understand why The Tramp became so popular so quickly. To many people, Chaplin’s tramp character is known for much more than just being funny looking and hobbling like a duck. The Tramp is an everyman who relates to- and stands up for- the poor regardless of his situation. We first see the political side of The Tramp in The Immigrant (1917), a film which shows the hardships of the immigrant experience, Chaplin’s character controversially kicks an immigration worker in the butt. The film is quite genius because it blends comedy and drama perfectly, it is a film that you can laugh and cry at, it is exceptional because it is truthful to this day.

Artistic intellectuals felt that The Tramp was an ingenious creation because he embodied no national identity and spoke no mother tongue, therefore he had touched the hearts of spectators from all corners of the Earth and all walk of life. Remarkably he is one of the few silent era characters, along with Buster Keaton, that is still known to this day.

Though Chaplin’s Tramp was built on action rather than dialogue, the arrival of sound into motion pictures would be inevitable. In 1927 the Warner Brothers Company would produce The Jazz Singer, the first ever feature length motion picture with synchronized dialogue sequences. The film’s very release brought about the rise of the “talkies” and the decline of the silent sound era. Though during the early years of “talkies” synchronizing sound would prove increasingly difficult and thus lead to a decline in overall quality in individual films, there was great public demand for them. The public demand for “talkies” was so great that many of the film stars who couldn’t, or refused to, convert to the new technology would fade from the spotlight and fall into obscurity. The careers of major silent film stars like Norma Talmadge,  John Gilbert, Harold Lloyd and the captivating Louise Brooks effectively ended this way.

The fact that Chaplin was still able to make a silent film (City Lights) four years after the arrival of sound was a true testament to his popularity, artistic integrity and his wealth. The arrival of sound films was a bigger challenge for Chaplin than for any other actor or director. Chaplin knew that his audience had certain expectations for The Tramps voice and he was afraid that he could not meet those expectations and fantasies. He did not want to lose what made him so popular by embracing sound, but he also didn’t want to become penniless and irrelevant. He had won world fame with the universal language of pantomime and if he made a sound film he knew he would lose a large part of his international audience that couldn’t understand the English language.  In a 1931 interview Chaplin would completely dismiss dialogue, predicting that it wouldn’t last more than half a year. It wouldn’t be until after City Lights and his world tour (1931-1932) until Chaplin would re-consider.

As evident in The Immigrant, Charles Chaplin had displayed a great political consciousness that frequently, if not always, sided with the proletariat community and was very critical towards the upper class and the people who were in charge of the lower class. However it wasn’t until after his world tour (1931-1932) that his social consciousness went into overdrive, inspiring him to create Modern Times, his film criticizing technology over humanity, and The Great Dictator, his personal attack against Hitler and the notoriously evil Nazi Regime.
           
By the mid-1930s Chaplin’s political opinions were well known to the public, thus they became essential to his image as a star. During his tour, in which he had visited pretty much all of Europe, China and Bali, incredibly famous and influential men willingly met with Chaplin to discuss world politics. This was not a shock to Chaplin as he had always been adored by great thinkers, often being the host to luxurious and decadent parties. While he was relentlessly pursued by great thinkers, he was also stalked by a foreboding presence, the American Federal Bureau of Investigation. The FBI had a file on him since 1919 and was waiting for him to slip up. Though Chaplin’s political views were not that controversial, at worst they could be considered “Marxist”, he didn’t really like to tell people about which party he belonged to, in retrospect that may have been the best thing for him to do as he was denied re-entry in 1952 because the FBI said they had a “pretty good case against him”.

While Chaplin was on his world tour it seemed like an incredible amount of history was happening around him. Back in America the depression which began in 1929 with the collapse of the Stock Market was getting worse and reaching farther corners of the globe, Hitler and his Nazi regime were gaining great influence over the lives of the German people, and Gandhi civil disobedience was driving England mad. Chaplin was learning more about the world’s suffering, thinking more about real socio-economic issues and reconsidering his views. Of course, it wasn’t until his meeting with Gandhi did his political mind get a real intellectual boost and perhaps change the course of Chaplin’s entire life.

On September 22nd, 1930 the world famous Comedian named Chaplin met with the considerably more famous Mahatma Gandhi in a poor neighborhood in London. Chaplin initially remarked to Gandhi, “I should like to know why you’re opposed to machinery. After all, it’s the natural outcome of man’s genius and is part of his evolutionary process.” Gandhi would disagree, stating that, “I wish to make our people independent of industry, which is the weapon the Western world holds over us.” Though Chaplin refused to agree with Gandhi at the time, the conversation with the Mahatma stuck with him and he would reflect on it for the rest of his life. His next film Modern Times (1936) would be a clear sign that Gandhi's words had given him a new outlook on life, as the entire film is a bold cry against authority and the machinery that had ruined the lives of many men.

By the time he came to prepare Modern Times it seemed like Chaplin had changed his mind about the use of sound. In the Chaplin Archives there is a script which features dialogue for every scene in the film. The dialogue he had considered for his own character was nonsensical and humorous; however after a day of rehearsal Chaplin was dissatisfied about the results. Though the majority of the dialogue would be cut. Chaplin did proceed with sound effects and took great personal interest in their creation. For a scene involving flatulence, he enjoyed found a way to create the sound by blowing bubbles from a straw into a pail of water. The very fact that he was willing to experiment with sound showed an interesting evolution regarding his willingness to use newer technology.

While Modern Times is mostly silent, there are very brief sequences of human sound. It is very interesting that the first words heard in a Chaplin film should come from the greedy and powerful boss of the factory where The Tramp works. “Quit stalling, get back to work!” Right from the start we get a sense of the power of sound and the downside of it. The fact that this sound, and many other authoritative sounds in this film is amplified by use of technology also shows Chaplin’s disgust for modern technology itself.

The vile boss of the factory is obviously based on American industrialist Henry Ford (1863-1947) founder of the Ford Motor Company which created automobiles that the average American could afford to buy. He also had perfected the development of the assembly line and made it acceptable for many other companies to use it similarly. It was actually when Chaplin visited a Ford factory and met the dictator himself that his previous conversation with Gandhi rang true. In these factories men were treated poorly, they were worked like machines and were expected to work a continuously fast pace over long hours or be replaced by somebody who could work even harder. The Tramp’s nervous breakdown in the beginning of the film is not a scene of fiction, many factory workers of that era experienced similar emotional and physical breakdowns due to the extreme stresses that were present in the sinister factories.

The theme of Modern Times, which is essentially about the oppression of the individual by the industrial complex, can be simplified as the use of the individual for something other than what he/she has intended. Chaplin has a variety of jobs, none of which he can stand, but all of which he performs rather well. It’s rather interesting that every frustration in The Tramp’s life is caused by the workplace and other institutions. These institutions are supposedly created to help and satisfy, at least provide money for a decent meal. However, Tramp’s jobs seem to last less than a day, his job as a mechanic lasts precisely half a day. When his job is over he seems to accidently land himself in jail.

Indeed when The Tramp is not working like a machine, he finds himself incarcerated. To be idle in a working society seems like an impossibility, as if it’s against the law or as if idleness must take place in an institutional setting like a jail. An irony f this film is that even though idleness is discouraged, it seems like the workplace encourages it despite being created in order to enforce work ethic.

The world of Modern Times is unfortunately quite topsy turvy. It is where honesty is punished and dishonesty is rewarded. One example of this is early in the film when Tramp picks up a flag that has dropped on the ground; he picks it up and tries to give it back, but unwillingly becomes part of a protest that is violently interrupted by police. He is immediately arrested as a conspirator. The way Chaplin portrayed the police’s ferocity toward the protesters was not an invention of his own, this what was actually happening to protesters in the 30’s. An example of dishonesty being rewarded is seen during every successful acquisition of food. It’s as if basic survival was dependent on breaking the law and thus creating freedom from institutions.
             
Modern Times would not be the last film which took place in a backwards world; Chaplin would soon turn his attention to the Nazi Regime which was slowly conquering Europe with great force. This doesn’t seem like a shocking move as he had strong hatred for authoritarian government in general ,  mostly because it was very dehumanizing,  like the machines of Modern Times. His public statements made it clear that this was not simple publicity game, he hated fascism with a passion.

Unfortunately for Chaplin, The Great Dictator may be the only example in his career of when he was ahead of the times. Hollywood clearly wanted to avoid the European politics at the time and simply pretend that they could avoid the Nazi mess. At the time many movies like Wizard of Oz were created as escapist films that didn’t really have an insightful political message. America itself was slightly anti-Semitic, the most famous example being American industrialist Henry Ford, who often gave expensive gifts to Adolf Hitler. Because of this, many Directors strongly discouraged Chaplin from making the film and their opinion definitely weighed heavily on his mind.

It’s quite interesting that this “sound” Chaplin had avoided most of his career, which was introduced into film by Jews in a Jewish movie named The Jazz Singer which was essentially about the lives of Jews, would be manipulated by an evil dictator who would attempt wipe out the Jews. Though Chaplin had a lot to lose when making this film; was this the time for comedy? He not only risked killing off his artistic persona known as The Tramp but also risked making a picture that just wasn’t funny. His solution was to create a “mistaken identity” picture, to twin his Tramp with the Tyrannical Hitler.

Perhaps the funniest aspect of The Great Dictator is Chaplin’s exploitation of sound. Chaplin obviously did a lot of studying in preparation for this film, mainly looking at Hitler’s infamous rallies. As Hynkel he has the real dictator’s movements and gestures down to a tee, even the tone of voice is consistent with the way Hitler talked. “Ah the big booben!” He speaks gibberish and mixes up a few English words that don’t quite fit into a serious speech. “Cheeze n daz crackers!” Interestingly enough his mockery doesn’t just include Hitler, later in the film there is also a bumbling and stumbling resemblance of Italian dictator Mussolini in the mix. The narrator throughout Chaplin’s speech is also quite hilarious.

The most important and well known scene in the film is Chaplin’s magnificent speech. It is incredibly powerful, but out of the blue and doesn’t fit with the comedic aspect of the film at all. However, at the time the words were needed to be said. In Chaplin’s response to his critics he says, “To me, it is a logical ending to the story. To me it is the speech that the little barber would have made-even had to make. It would have been much easier to have the barber and Hannah disappear over the horizon, off to the Promised Land. But there is no promised land for the oppressed people of the world. They must stand and we must stand.”

Unfortunately getting The Tramp to speak also meant putting to death the character that had made his creator famous and taking the risk of exposing himself without a mask. This film ended Chaplin’s reliance on slapstick comedy and perhaps for the first time, his character was willingly putting himself into danger instead of accidently falling into it. Did the speech at the end of the film compromise Chaplin’s ability to sustain a comedic tone throughout the film? Chaplin was aware of these issues, but as he claims, The Great Dictator was the “First picture in which the story is bigger than the Little Tramp.”

Bibliography
 1. Vance, Jeffery. Chaplin: Genius of the Cinema. New York: Roy Export, 2009. Print.

2. Chaplin, Charles. My Autobiography. New York: Simon & Schuster. 1964. Print 

3. Modern Times. Dir. Charles Chaplin. Charles Chaplin Productions, 1936. Film.

4. The Great Dictator. Dir. Charles Chaplin. Charles Chaplin Productions, 1940. Film.

5. Robinson, David. Audio Commentary. Modern Times. Dir. Chaplin. Perf. Charles Chaplin and Paulette Godard. Criterion Collection. 2010. DVD

6. Bengston, John. Visual Essay. Modern Times. Dir. Chaplin. Perf. Charles Chaplin and Paulette Godard. Criterion Collection. 2010. DVD

7. Vance, Jeffery. Visual Essay. Modern Times. Dir. Chaplin. Perf. Charles Chaplin and Paulette Godard. Criterion Collection. 2010. DVD

8. Austerlitz, Saul. Booklet Essay. Modern Times. Dir. Chaplin. Perf. Charles Chaplin and Paulette Godard. Criterion Collection. 2010. DVD

9. Stein, Lisa. Booklet Essay. Modern Times. Dir. Chaplin. Perf. Charles Chaplin and Paulette Godard. Criterion Collection. 2010. DVD

10. Winokur, Mark.” Modern Times and the Comedy of Transformation.” Literature/Film Quarterly, Vol. 15, No. 4 (1987) 219-226. Print.

11. Kamin Dan and Hooman Mehran. Audio Commentary. The Great Dictator. Dir. Chaplin. Perf. Charles Chaplin and Paulette Godard. Criterion Collection. 2011. DVD.

12.  Cenciarelli, Cecillia. Visual Essay. The Great Dictator. Dir. Chaplin. Perf. Charles Chaplin and Paulette Godard. Criterion Collection. 2011. DVD.

13.  Vance, Jeffery. Visual Essay. The Great Dictator. Dir. Chaplin. Perf. Charles Chaplin and Paulette Godard. Criterion Collection. 2011. DVD.

14.  Wood, Michael. Booklet Essay. The Great Dictator. Dir. Chaplin. Perf. Charles Chaplin and Paulette Godard. Criterion Collection. 2011. DVD.

Friday, September 7, 2012

The Circus Review- By Michael Carlisle

 Title: The Circus
Director: Charlie Chaplin
Year: 1928
Country: US
Language: English



I first saw Chaplin's The Circus on TCM (Turner Classic Movies) a few years ago. I first heard of this film because of the infamous "time traveling" woman controversy that spread like wildfire across the internet back in October 2010. Around that date George Clarke, an Irish filmmaker, uploaded a video on youtube which showed a woman walks past holding her left hand to the side of her face while moving her lips. The clip has not been tampered with and is subject to great interpretation. A lot of people thought the woman was carrying a cell phone. The problem? Cell phones weren't invented yet! Though neither were cell phone towers so it's unlikely the woman travelled through time and used her phone. The more logical solution is that she war wearing an old timey hearing aid.

Charlie Chaplin's The Circus stars Chaplin's comic persona The Tramp as a man who finds himself at a circus because he's trying to escape the police who think he's a notorious pick pocketer. The Tramp is an accedental sensation due to the fact that his attempts to evade the police are absolutely hilarious. The owner hires him immediately but soon realizes that The Tramp can't be funny on purpose so he hires him as a Janitor who just so happend to always be at the big top during showtime. The Tramp is blissfully unaware of this, he also happen's to fall in love with the owner's daughter. He has a great chance to win her over, but alas he has a rival and must compete for her heart.

While this film is not as funny or socially and politically important as Modern Times, City Lights, Gold Rush, The Kid or Great Dictator it still is a pretty decent film. I also admire Chaplin for making this film when his personal life was in shambles. First the film was made a year after sound was introduced to the cinema, silent actors were already being put on the unemployment line, he was under great pressure. He also married a 16 year old girl named Lita Grey. He found out she was pregnant during filming and then she sued him and threatened to tell the public about her age. Unfortunately they agreed on $600,000, while the IRS claimed he owed them over a million dollars in taxes.

The cinematography in this film is rather good, hiding Chaplin's real distance from the ground and creating the illusion that he is actually on a tightrope suspended many feet above the ground. His demand for perfectionism required over 200 takes for that one scene, a rival for Kubrick. The other sight gags are well made, as are all in his film, but easily forgettable compared to the sight gags his other films. There is a remarkable scene with Chaplin in a lion's cage. Sure there were efforts made to ensure his safety, but there were still of lot of great risks. Co-ordinating that scene must have been extremely difficult and took a lot of guts.

In conclusion, it was really hard for me to write a review about this because there's not much to say about The Circus. It's a mediocre Chaplin film, a man with such a political mind could have made something much better. Though it's still admirable that he made it under such extreme pressure from both his personal life and the cinema and it's still pretty well made and decently funny. Unfortunately while I've seen his greater films an upwards of ten times each, I wouldn't watch this film again. 3/5


Modern Times Review- By Michael Carlisle

Title: Modern Times
Director: Charlie Chaplin
Year: 1935
Country: US
Language: English


Surprisingly, I wasn't aware of Charlie Chaplin's Modern Times until I had saw that the Criterion Collection was releasing it. By then I had seen majority of Chaplin's films up to 1931 including The Great Dictator and Limelight. My initial reaction was that Modern Times was one of his more mature political comedies. It made a great bold statement which must have been met with some controversy. Indeed it was one of the films the FBI would use in their defense to assist in getting Chaplin deported from the country in the early 50's. This film is his hilariously cynical satire against modern technology and an ode to the silent films that made him known worldwide.

In the early part of the twentieth century Chaplin built an empire of a career in silent cinema. He created his own character, The Tramp, a purely silent character who could not exist in a world of sound. Unfortunately, due to great pressures, Modern Times was Chaplin's last "silent" film. Though there are a few sounds, they are usually gibberish or the very authoritative words of a strict boss. Sound is not viewed in a good light. Modern Times is Chaplin's turn against modern society and the machine age. It is a strong rebellion against everything Nazi sympathizer Henry Ford stood for. The film starts with Chaplin's slow mental breakdown at a factory, when he gets out he is mistaken for a communist and sent to jail. He gets out but desperately wants to go back. The film follows his many hilarious escapades

This film is a true testament to Chaplin's ability to be both comedic and serious at the same time. He is a mature clown with a VERY important statement to make. Chaplin uses his film, like he has used many of his films, as a social critique.. This social critique is against technology and how it dehumanizes people. It is a powerful statement against both the rules and systems in place that prevent human progress.Chaplin and his lady's anti-authority stance is clear from the very beginning when he likens workers as sheep and as machines. Technology seems to consume the life of almost everyone in this film.The Deluxe Feeding Machine reduces men into babies by feeding them because they cannot feed themselves as quickly as their bosses want them to eat. There are strikes all around because machines are replacing men. This is reality in Chaplin's time and is still a sad reality.

This film also shows Chaplin's strong dislike for the "system" Chaplin gets arrested three separate times in this film, sadly his life in jail is actually better than his life outside, where he constantly has to look for a job and listen to the dumb demands of his overbearing bosses.In the jail he is at least treated like a human being, instead of a number. The "criminals" of this film are easily sympathized with, since all they are doing is either stealing because they are hungry or protesting because they are job-less. However, the ending has a rather optimistic feel. You can succeed, but not if you are one of the sheep. Rebel against the system and don't be turned into a wage slave. Through great struggle there will be great triumph, as Chaplin and his lover walk off into the sunset, happy as they walk down the road to opportunity away from technology and the silliness of society's "rules".

In conclusion, Charlie Chaplin's Modern Times is arguably more relevant now than it was when it was first show in theaters. While technology can help mankind, it has assisted in restoring Chaplin's pictures and making them available to the public, it also has the ability to hurt mankind. More and more jobs are being taken over by technology. The advancement of technology has allowed more jobs to be located overseas, where people are willing to work like machines for low pay because there are fewer laws in place to help the average worker and it's better than nothing. The struggle to be human in the technological age is increasing at a rapid rate. Hopefully we can eventually get a hold of technology, before technology gets a hold of us. Praise it! 5/5




Wednesday, September 5, 2012

The Gold Rush Review- By Michael Carlisle

Title: The Gold Rush
Director: Charlie Chaplin
Year: 1925
Country: US
Language: English


After seeing  Charlie Chaplin's The Kid, The Circus, City Lights, Modern Times and The Great Dictator I made a conscious effort not to see The Gold Rush because I feared it would be a let down. What artist can have a perfect filmography? It was only until I heard that the Criterion Collection was releasing this film with a special edition that I sought it out. It played at the local Cinematheque in May for four days. After seeing the film in theatres once I decided to go again...and again...and again. While I feel it isn't as good as Modern Times  it's still pretty damn good. I bought the Criterion DVD when it was released and I still find it hilarious, even though I've seen it over ten times.

Charlie Chaplin made The Gold Rush after an unsuccessful attempt at melodrama with A Woman in Paris which was a purposeful attempt at breaking away from the simplistic comedies of his early career. Despite returning to his original comedic genre, he still had a newfound sense of ambition. If he was going to make a comedy he would make something worthwhile that would be remembered throughout the ages. The result, this film.Combined with inspiration from a series of slides detailing a vast march of Klondike gold prospectors and a gruesome account of an expedition leading to cannibalism,The Gold Rush is just as grand and engaging as any serious drama Chaplin wanted to make. Chaplin's commitment to make this rather unpleasant story a heartwarming comedy is what cements this film among the greats.

Despite being referenced by many modern films and television shows,this film is sometimes remembered as merely a series of comic scenes. What is often neglected about The Gold Rush is the pure craftsmanship that went along with every scene. Chaplin knew how to use the right amount of special effects, music and acting to make his scenes incredibly tense or incredibly funny. Film historians are still impressed by how advanced Chaplin's technical skills were compared to the average filmmaker of the 1920's. Chaplin was nearly peerless with his comedy, satires and social crticism. With The Gold Rush he exposed the inhumane atrocities of Klondike prospecting life and the class struggles around the time  and the adherence to them which prevemted proper human interaction.

The Gold Rush shows hom much Charlie Chaplin has matured as a filmmaker. Subtle but deceptively inventive camera-work perfectly compliments each scene whether it is to create a bold statement with sweeping long shots or to show great great emmotion and tenderness with intimate close-ups. This film is far from simple gags, it is an emotional and technical masterpiece. One of the strongest cinematic works produced during the silent era, itt highlights Chaplin's genius as well as his sentimental side. You can't help but root for the Little Tramp to get the girl and a gold, even when he accidentally uses a leash (dog included) for a belt.

In conclusion, you'll laugh, smile and cry because of this delightful masterwork. I plan to see this film on the big screen again, when it comes to the Symphony Orchestra in 2013. Maybe this is more of a winter film, and the jokes will be more relevant to people who live in a cold city for most of the year. In that case Canadians young and old will love this film. While City Lights is often regarded as Chaplin's best work, I feel this truly shows the director's love for film. Praise it! 5/5

City Lights Review- By Michael Carlisle

Title: City Lights
Director: Charlie Chaplin
Year: 1931
Country: US
Language: English

I wish I could relive my introduction to the master of silent cinema, Charles Chaplin. I first saw City Lights in a video production course back in grade 11 and I still remember being enchanted by the lovely little tramp. The slapstick humor of Chaplin's was simple yet incredibly effective. The melodrama elicited great emotional response and could bring even men with heart's of stone to tears. City Lights also required a lot of guts from its director. It was a silent film made four few years after the introduction of sound. Most silent film stars either adjusted to the new practice or were crushed by it, Chaplin stood his ground despite enormous pressure and therefore his film became a great classic.

City Lights is a bittersweet film about a Tramp (Charlie Chaplin) who meets a blind girl selling flowers, and during one of the most ingenious scenes in the history of film, mistakes him for a wealthy gentleman. This presents a challenge for the Tramp. He is very interested in the girl yet the girl may only like him because she thinks he is rich, the little tramp is far too nervous to reveal his secret.When he learns that an operation may restore her sight, he sets off to earn the money she needs to have the surgery. Throughout a series of comedic and sometimes tragic events we follow his journey to getting this money, and wind up with a masterfully tearjerking ending.

Chaplin's disregard for sound was very logical. With silence his film had no boundaries, they could be seen anywhere in the world by anyone. They broke down barriers between nations and became something everyone could enjoy. Besides, Chaplin's popularity was known worldwide, to make a talkie might as well be flipping the bird to all the non-English speakers who adored him. He would only make a talkie when it was absolutely necessary, indeed that held true when The Great Dictator (his first talkie) was released in 1940 as a brutal,brave and essential attack against the ever growing Nazi Regime.

The tramp also didn't express himself through speech. He was a rowdy, funny and emotional character through his actions. His body language is a substitute for speech. He seems to stand apart from the other characters throughout the film, not really having a background, not really having a home. He clearly doesn't belong in society as the only people that seem to interact with him in this film are a drunk millionaire, who immediately forgets who he is once he's sober, and a blind flower girl. The Tramp is a loner and an outcast but that's likely why we root for him.

In conclusion, City Lights will both tug at your heartstrings and tickle your funny bone. The great comedic sequences, which include a hilarious boxing scene in which Chaplin is clearly the underdog, are among the funniest scenes I have seen in film. Rivaled only by the cocaine scene in Chaplin's other masterpiece Modern Times. It is a great thrill to see a comedy that doesn't rely on bad gross out, stoner or pop culture jokes. Unfortunately Chaplin's films are for those who seek them out, I wish they were as mainstream now as they were in the 30's. Chaplin's films show that humor and intelligence don't need to seperate, they can co-exist perfectly.Praise it! 5/5


Saturday, June 16, 2012

The Great Dictator Review- By Michael Carlisle

Title: The Great Dictator
Year: 1940
Director: Charlie Chaplin
Country: US
Language: English

When sound was on the brink of destroying the world, the most famous silent movie star decided to speak for the first time- against the injustice that seemed to be around every corner. In  1938, Charlie Chaplin decided  to put his career on the line and prepare a film about one of the most powerful monsters mankind has ever seen, Adolph Hitler.

Hitler has been a fan of Chaplin’s for many years, bearing Chaplin’s toothbrush moustache because of how well loved Chaplin was in Europe at that time. Hitler said himself that he would love it if Chaplin would play him in a film. Chaplin was not flattered by this comment, as he despised everything the nazi regime stood for.  However, this resemblance gave Chaplin a grand opportunity to make fun of the Fuhrer. The Great Dictator is a satire in which the dictator and a Jewish barber from the ghetto would be mistaken for each other. Chaplin’s first talkie spoke volumes to the people who were inspired by it as it was the highest-grossing of his career. However, as a consequence for speaking the truth, it would cause him great difficulties and indirectly lead to his long exile from the United States.

Piss on Wizard of Oz!
A lot of people did not want Chaplin to make this film. In 1938 Hitler wasn’t recognized as the essence of evil like he is known today. Anti-Semitism in America was rampant, some welcomed Hitler’s policy of exterminating the Jews. The famous, rich and powerful Henry Ford was a well known Nazi sympathizer and would often send Hitler gifts. America also preached a policy of non-intervention in the already war-torn Europe. The people who had a strong dislike for Hitler before America entered the war were considered “communists”. Film industries would attempt to avoid the nazi topic alltogether by making feel good fantasies like 1939's Wizard of Oz.  Even the speech at the end of The Great Dictator was controversial for pre-World War II America. Though many people at the time felt this film was un-welcomed, today we receive it with open arms. However, if Chaplin knew what we know now about the horrible persecution of the Jewish people in the Holocaust, Chaplin would have not have made the film. Thus it would’ve been much harder for Americans to rid their selfish & often anti-semetic ways.

Oddly a lot of Chaplin’s well known films are comedies based of unfortunate events. The Gold Rush is based on the Donner party, a bunch of people who got trapped in the snow and had to eat each other. Modern Times was about how industrialization was turning men into machines. The Great Dictator is about one of the most evil villains in history. The film's mockery of Hitler got it banned in Spain, Italy and neutral Ireland, but in America and elsewhere, it played with an impact that, today, may be hard to imagine. The universally loved “Tramp” had transformed into a courageous satire of the devil himself.

The plot of this film is quite simple. The hero, a barber-soldier in World War I, saves the life of a German pilot named Schultz and flies him to safety, not knowing the person he saved was the enemy. Their crash-landing gives the barber amnesia, and for 20 years he doesn't know who he is. Then he recovers and returns to his barber shop in the country of Tomania only to discover that the dictator Hynkel has come to power under the double cross instead of the swastika. Hynkel’s storm troopers are at full throttle, terrorizing jews and smashing up windows. The barber is in love with a woman named Hanna, played by Chaplin’s then wife Paulette Godard, but unfortunately love doesn’t save them from the tragedies of a concentration camp.  As luck would have it Hynkel ‘s boat doesn’t float, he then is mistaken for the barber, and locked into the camp just as the barber and his friend escape with Hynkel’s uniform. With uniform on the barber is identical to the dictator.

What would a Chaplin film be without the ingenious gags? “Ah the big booben!” Chaplin obviously did a lot of study and preparation for this film as he gets Hitler’s actions and movements down to a tee. He speaks gibberish, but in the same tone as hitler, and mixes up a few non-sensical English words. “Cheeze n daz crackers!”. Interestingly enough his mockery doesn’t just include Hitler, there is also a bumbling and stumbling resemblance of Italian dictator Mussolini in the mix. There is a funny narration, confusing saluting and many other hilarious jokes mixed in to this film.

All this in the 1940’s would’ve come off as incredibly controversial and, dare I say it, ballsy. Few people in America would dare insult the Nazi regime. Chaplin launched his own comedic torpedo at Hitler and it proved to be a critical hit. It received Oscar nominations, for picture, actor, supporting actor screenplay and music. Interestingly enough, today the film is not as well known as the ending speech of the film which now has a separate Youtube video complete with the soundtrack from 2010’s Inception.

This speech both hurts and helps the film. It is incredibly powerful  but out of the blue and doesn’t fit with the comedic aspect of the film at all. However, at the time somebody needed to say the words Chaplin did in  
The Great Dictator. It was a necessity that could not wait, his goal was not only to bring hope and joy to people but to help bring action against Hitler. Though the speech doesn’t really fit, it has done wonders for generations and generations of people. He made his statement and it found a large audience.

In conclusion, The Great Dictator is a funny and incredibly brave film by one of the world’s greatest actor directors.  When the world was being consumed by a great voice of evil, Chaplin knew silence wouldn’t suffice. He used his money, influence and genius to speak volumes. This film was essential  in reducing American anti-semitism and increasing funding to Jewish refugee centers. It was also essential in helping America see the light through the thick veil of darkness. Chaplin is the embodiment love, and this film proves it. Praise it! 5/5