THE TOPICAL CHAPLIN
Adam Tate, Studio Operations Coordinator, Austin Film Society
MONSIEUR VERDOUX is the eighth feature-length film in Charles Chaplin’s expansive career. The “Comedy of Murders” originated in the mind of Orson Welles, who sold his intellectual property to Chaplin in exchange for an “idea by” credit. The film is, of course, tame by today’s standards, but it caused a firestorm of debate among audiences and critics upon its 1947 release. Had the creator of The Little Tramp lost his mind, gone over the edge by making a comedy about a charming serial killer? Only when one can put Chaplin’s body of work under a microscope does his decision reflect his brilliance; he was using his films to make social and political commentary after he laid The Little Tramp to rest.
It is impossible to analyze Chaplin’s later efforts without placing his earlier films in context. Having just emigrated from London in 1914, 25-year-old Chaplin went to work for Keystone and Essanay, film companies where his youthful zeal and active imagination subtly refined and polished the “Tramp” character over the course of two years. By 1916, Chaplin had signed a $10,000 per week contract with the Mutual Film Company, and the raging talent was released from its cage: Charlie began writing, directing, and starring in his own two-reel comedies. THE KID (1921), his first full-length film released just after his divorce from underage Mildred Harris, began to paint the Tramp as a three-dimensional character through his surrogate father-son relationship with the titular character (Jackie Coogan). “Without question, marriage to Mildred seemed to be having a very bad effect on my creative faculties,” Chaplin regretted, and his new bachelorhood allowed him to make longer, more effective and engrossing films. The Little Tramp continued to develop as a nomadic survivor in THE GOLD RUSH (1925) and THE CIRCUS (1928), overcoming starvation, frostbite, and unrehearsed high-altitude acrobatics, among other life-threatening burdens.
The audience finally sees the beginnings of a socially conscious Chaplin in CITY LIGHTS (1931) wherein the Tramp falls for an impoverished, blind flower salesgirl (Virginia Cherrill). Through a series of comedic ballets, Cherrill believes the Tramp to be a rich man, and the latter has no qualms about exploiting the error. Chaplin allows the Tramp to recognize his place in established class structure, and we finally see a longing lament in the Tramp’s monochromatic eyes when his love’s sight-restorative operation reveals that she cannot perceive the Tramp and the “wealthy man” as one. The Tramp’s final film appearance in MODERN TIMES (1936) pits him against the Industrial Revolution, and instead of looking for food and shelter, he yearns to maintain a job amongst the machines. Unlike every film previous, however, the Tramp finally walks away in the final moment, not alone, but with his love (Paulette Godard). It is clear that Chaplin had laid the character to rest because he allowed the Tramp to keep a modicum of structure, a hint of comfort and personal development as the film faded to black.
Chaplin’s next film plainly established him as a topical filmmaker. THE GREAT DICTATOR (1940) features the character of Adenoid Hynkel (Chaplin, of course), the bumbling leader of fictional Tomania who bears a striking resemblance to Hitler. One particular scene encapsulates the director’s perspective of World War II: Hynkel joyously bounces an inflatable globe with his finger, his head, and his rear. “Had I known about the actual horrors of the Nazi concentration camps, I could not have made THE GREAT DICTATOR…,” Chaplin states, “…I wanted to ridicule their mystic bilge about a pure-blooded race.” The film was an enormous box-office success, but Chaplin began to achieve false notoriety as a Communist sympathizer when he began supporting the Second Front in 1942. While it is commonly known today that he had no intention of supporting Communism, the combination of his latest film banned in Nazi-occupied Europe and an outspoken support of controversial left-wing war tactics began to tarnish his reputation among politicians and tabloid writers.
Chaplin developed MONSIEUR VERDOUX over the course of four years. In that span of time, the Allies had proved victorious over the Axis powers, and the “Red Scare” was just beginning to enter the public conscience. The plot of the film centers on Henri Verdoux, a husband and father who has made a career of bigamy and murder for profit. Verdoux was a respected banker until the Great Depression, and decided to develop many relationships with wealthy single women as a “business enterprise.” The character’s basis for his crimes is set in motion by an economic dysfunction; his demeanor and intelligence illustrate a man with no mental pathology. The impetus for Verdoux to murder is fueled by his need to stay rooted in the upper middle class, but this does not define him as cold-hearted. His wife Mona is disabled, and his young son Peter is a budding entrepreneur himself. Although the audience does not spend a large portion of the film with the Verdoux family unit, Chaplin still allows for a simple justification for the murders: support for a family that is clearly in need.
We meet Verdoux as he begins to pursue Marie Grosnay (Isobel Elsom) as he is just about to finish off Annabella Bonheur (Martha Raye). Grosnay is prudish and resists Verdoux’s advances while Annabella finds unconscious methods of foiling Verdoux’s plans. Both plotlines feature key scenes that reflect the futile efforts of the Tramp in earlier films. In a particularly humorous sequence, Verdoux rows a boat to the center of a remote lake for a private strangling of Annabella. Try after try, he cannot kill her; Chaplin has crafted a scene that begs the audience to root for him as he desperately attempts to silence her shrill tone and impudent behavior. Later, Verdoux has finally swayed Grosnay into a wedding ceremony, and the spotting of newly deserted Annabella forces the main character into a delightfully urgent game of hide-and-seek. By employing his well-honed slapstick craft, Chaplin keeps the audience engaged and alert to his every action; he successfully renders the murderer as hero. He even dresses the character in costumes that resemble that of the Tramp’s, notably the scenes on the streets of Paris.
The final scenes reveal the filmmaker’s societal and political critiques. Verdoux is captured through a connection between Grosnay and a previous victim’s family, and sentenced to public execution. While awaiting the guillotine, Verdoux meets with members of the press and utters the lines of dialogue that are the summation of his personal and political stance: “Numbers sanctify.” When asked if he wishes to atone for his sins, Verdoux responds, “Wars, conflict - it's all business. One murder makes a villain; millions, a hero. Numbers sanctify, my good fellow...I’m at peace with God, my conflict is with man.” Verdoux then takes a drink and walks to his sentencing.
This scene essentially ends Chaplin as the topical filmmaker. He made a film in which the main character’s actions are personally justified because he operates among governments who celebrate war victory despite collateral human damage and who will deny humanitarian aid for fear of leftist influence. That Verdoux takes a drink right before his death ominously reflected Chaplin’s own plight: he was later summoned by the House of Un-American Activities Committee and eventually exiled, not to mention publicly humiliated with a paternity suit from socialite actress Joan Barry.
His transition from entertainer to provocateur peaked at the release of MONSIEUR VERDOUX, and his later features did not have a political underpinning. Chaplin unknowingly carved a path for celebrities to use their clout for their political and social concerns. Only now can we see that he was never an enemy, but an artist who developed his craft in his beloved adopted country, and attempted to give back by fearlessly proclaiming what he believed to be right in the face of many strong opponents.
WORKS
Chaplin, Charles. My Life In Pictures. New York: Grosset & Dunlap Publishers, 1975.
Hoberman, J. “When Chaplin Became The Enemy .” THE NEW YORK TIMES 8 June, 2008.
MONSIEUR VERDOUX. Prod. Charles Chaplin. Dir. Charles Chaplin. Perf. Charles Chaplin, Martha Raye, and Marilyn Nash. DVD, Warner/MK2, 1947.
Adam Tate, Studio Operations Coordinator, Austin Film Society
MONSIEUR VERDOUX is the eighth feature-length film in Charles Chaplin’s expansive career. The “Comedy of Murders” originated in the mind of Orson Welles, who sold his intellectual property to Chaplin in exchange for an “idea by” credit. The film is, of course, tame by today’s standards, but it caused a firestorm of debate among audiences and critics upon its 1947 release. Had the creator of The Little Tramp lost his mind, gone over the edge by making a comedy about a charming serial killer? Only when one can put Chaplin’s body of work under a microscope does his decision reflect his brilliance; he was using his films to make social and political commentary after he laid The Little Tramp to rest.
It is impossible to analyze Chaplin’s later efforts without placing his earlier films in context. Having just emigrated from London in 1914, 25-year-old Chaplin went to work for Keystone and Essanay, film companies where his youthful zeal and active imagination subtly refined and polished the “Tramp” character over the course of two years. By 1916, Chaplin had signed a $10,000 per week contract with the Mutual Film Company, and the raging talent was released from its cage: Charlie began writing, directing, and starring in his own two-reel comedies. THE KID (1921), his first full-length film released just after his divorce from underage Mildred Harris, began to paint the Tramp as a three-dimensional character through his surrogate father-son relationship with the titular character (Jackie Coogan). “Without question, marriage to Mildred seemed to be having a very bad effect on my creative faculties,” Chaplin regretted, and his new bachelorhood allowed him to make longer, more effective and engrossing films. The Little Tramp continued to develop as a nomadic survivor in THE GOLD RUSH (1925) and THE CIRCUS (1928), overcoming starvation, frostbite, and unrehearsed high-altitude acrobatics, among other life-threatening burdens.
The audience finally sees the beginnings of a socially conscious Chaplin in CITY LIGHTS (1931) wherein the Tramp falls for an impoverished, blind flower salesgirl (Virginia Cherrill). Through a series of comedic ballets, Cherrill believes the Tramp to be a rich man, and the latter has no qualms about exploiting the error. Chaplin allows the Tramp to recognize his place in established class structure, and we finally see a longing lament in the Tramp’s monochromatic eyes when his love’s sight-restorative operation reveals that she cannot perceive the Tramp and the “wealthy man” as one. The Tramp’s final film appearance in MODERN TIMES (1936) pits him against the Industrial Revolution, and instead of looking for food and shelter, he yearns to maintain a job amongst the machines. Unlike every film previous, however, the Tramp finally walks away in the final moment, not alone, but with his love (Paulette Godard). It is clear that Chaplin had laid the character to rest because he allowed the Tramp to keep a modicum of structure, a hint of comfort and personal development as the film faded to black.
Chaplin’s next film plainly established him as a topical filmmaker. THE GREAT DICTATOR (1940) features the character of Adenoid Hynkel (Chaplin, of course), the bumbling leader of fictional Tomania who bears a striking resemblance to Hitler. One particular scene encapsulates the director’s perspective of World War II: Hynkel joyously bounces an inflatable globe with his finger, his head, and his rear. “Had I known about the actual horrors of the Nazi concentration camps, I could not have made THE GREAT DICTATOR…,” Chaplin states, “…I wanted to ridicule their mystic bilge about a pure-blooded race.” The film was an enormous box-office success, but Chaplin began to achieve false notoriety as a Communist sympathizer when he began supporting the Second Front in 1942. While it is commonly known today that he had no intention of supporting Communism, the combination of his latest film banned in Nazi-occupied Europe and an outspoken support of controversial left-wing war tactics began to tarnish his reputation among politicians and tabloid writers.
Chaplin developed MONSIEUR VERDOUX over the course of four years. In that span of time, the Allies had proved victorious over the Axis powers, and the “Red Scare” was just beginning to enter the public conscience. The plot of the film centers on Henri Verdoux, a husband and father who has made a career of bigamy and murder for profit. Verdoux was a respected banker until the Great Depression, and decided to develop many relationships with wealthy single women as a “business enterprise.” The character’s basis for his crimes is set in motion by an economic dysfunction; his demeanor and intelligence illustrate a man with no mental pathology. The impetus for Verdoux to murder is fueled by his need to stay rooted in the upper middle class, but this does not define him as cold-hearted. His wife Mona is disabled, and his young son Peter is a budding entrepreneur himself. Although the audience does not spend a large portion of the film with the Verdoux family unit, Chaplin still allows for a simple justification for the murders: support for a family that is clearly in need.
We meet Verdoux as he begins to pursue Marie Grosnay (Isobel Elsom) as he is just about to finish off Annabella Bonheur (Martha Raye). Grosnay is prudish and resists Verdoux’s advances while Annabella finds unconscious methods of foiling Verdoux’s plans. Both plotlines feature key scenes that reflect the futile efforts of the Tramp in earlier films. In a particularly humorous sequence, Verdoux rows a boat to the center of a remote lake for a private strangling of Annabella. Try after try, he cannot kill her; Chaplin has crafted a scene that begs the audience to root for him as he desperately attempts to silence her shrill tone and impudent behavior. Later, Verdoux has finally swayed Grosnay into a wedding ceremony, and the spotting of newly deserted Annabella forces the main character into a delightfully urgent game of hide-and-seek. By employing his well-honed slapstick craft, Chaplin keeps the audience engaged and alert to his every action; he successfully renders the murderer as hero. He even dresses the character in costumes that resemble that of the Tramp’s, notably the scenes on the streets of Paris.
The final scenes reveal the filmmaker’s societal and political critiques. Verdoux is captured through a connection between Grosnay and a previous victim’s family, and sentenced to public execution. While awaiting the guillotine, Verdoux meets with members of the press and utters the lines of dialogue that are the summation of his personal and political stance: “Numbers sanctify.” When asked if he wishes to atone for his sins, Verdoux responds, “Wars, conflict - it's all business. One murder makes a villain; millions, a hero. Numbers sanctify, my good fellow...I’m at peace with God, my conflict is with man.” Verdoux then takes a drink and walks to his sentencing.
This scene essentially ends Chaplin as the topical filmmaker. He made a film in which the main character’s actions are personally justified because he operates among governments who celebrate war victory despite collateral human damage and who will deny humanitarian aid for fear of leftist influence. That Verdoux takes a drink right before his death ominously reflected Chaplin’s own plight: he was later summoned by the House of Un-American Activities Committee and eventually exiled, not to mention publicly humiliated with a paternity suit from socialite actress Joan Barry.
His transition from entertainer to provocateur peaked at the release of MONSIEUR VERDOUX, and his later features did not have a political underpinning. Chaplin unknowingly carved a path for celebrities to use their clout for their political and social concerns. Only now can we see that he was never an enemy, but an artist who developed his craft in his beloved adopted country, and attempted to give back by fearlessly proclaiming what he believed to be right in the face of many strong opponents.
WORKS
Chaplin, Charles. My Life In Pictures. New York: Grosset & Dunlap Publishers, 1975.
Hoberman, J. “When Chaplin Became The Enemy .” THE NEW YORK TIMES 8 June, 2008.
MONSIEUR VERDOUX. Prod. Charles Chaplin. Dir. Charles Chaplin. Perf. Charles Chaplin, Martha Raye, and Marilyn Nash. DVD, Warner/MK2, 1947.
