Word: chaplinitis
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: all
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
...Chaplin is not trying to make the simpleminded and useless statement that even murderers have their good points. He is after something deeper, exploring the ambivalences of modern society. Verdoux deeply believes his acts are excusable, and we want to know why. The only time he allows himself to be swayed from his unhesitating ruthlessness is when he picks up a derelict girl (Marilyn Nash) in order to test a new poison and finds that she, like him, could "kill for love." When he discovers their similarity, she gains his respect. He removes her poisoned glass of wine with...
Leaping into the mind of such a confusing character is not an easy task for an actor, but, in this 1947 film, Chaplin delves beyond the paradoxes of the man's mind, using him as a vehicle for attacking the unpunished mass murderers--the governments of the world...
...Chaplin builds no sympathy for Verdoux's crimes. The profits accruing from Verdoux's enterprises support a crippled wife and a small son, so, at first glance, the film appears to be an apology for the economic ruthlessness forced on Verdoux after he lost his job in the depression. But when he surprises his wife (Mady Correll) by telling her that he has been able to pay off their mortgage, she realizes that they were happier when they were poor. Cut off from the truth about her husband, she nevertheless recognizes the corrosive side effects of his work...
...CHAPLIN'S performance itself is an extraordinary evocation of contradictory emotions. The murderer he plays is both compassionate and utterly despicable--not a split personality but both, simultaneously. The details which reveal Verdoux's character are not mere signposts, as in most films. Chaplin does not show us a man playing with a cat and then expect us to assume on that basis alone that the man has a redeeming facet. Instead, every detail--including the feeding of the cat, every vicious maneuver, every noble gesture, every sparkle in his eyes--contributes to the development of two sides of Verdoux...
Verdoux's self-righteous stand at the close of Monsieur Verdoux is probably one reason the film was so ill-received when it first appeared in 1947. The public was already upset with Chaplin because he was involved in a paternity suit and because he was accused of being a Communist. Audiences simply would not countenance what seemed to them a false show of morality. Verdoux was given favorable notice by only a handful of critics, and in two years of circulation it reached only about one-sixth as many theaters as the average grade B movie...