Charlie Chaplin - Monsieur Verdoux details
|Starring:||Mady Correll, Irving Bacon, Martha Raye, Charlie Chaplin, Marilyn Nash, Isobel Elsom, Marjorie Bennett, Robert Lewis|
|Studio:||WARNER HOME VIDEO|
Charlie Chaplin - Monsieur Verdoux
|Run time:||1 hour 58 minutes|
|Rental release:||Limited availability|
Most helpful review
The master in his final roleBy a customer from Ireland, west of the Shannon , 13 Aug 2005
[Highly rated reviewer]I'm old enough to remember reading the critical notices of this film when it first appeared, and they were hyper-critical, reckoning that it was a turkey and bound to flop. I think I'm right in saying that, with The Great Dictator, it's one of Charlie Chaplin's very few films with full dialogue. Behind the humour, which is fairly black as befits the main character being a serial killer, particularly of his many wives, there is the familiar Chaplin social message, which he delivers as his speech from the dock of the condemned man. There are touches of the familiar Charlie Chaplin, the consummate clown, but throughout he is the star and one cannot take one's eyes off him for an instant. I found it enthralling, even allowing for some distinctly amateurish acting in early scenes by bit-part players, and for the fact that the film is probably too long for its subject. Further interest is provided by the fact that the central idea was provided by Orson Welles to Chaplin (who also directs the film and, one guesses, wrote the backing music.)
Fans of Charlie Chaplin need to see Monsieur Verdoux in the context of it being his last feature film.
- Was this review helpful to you?
- (6) Yes |
- No (1)
Chaplin loses a plotBy MrTony (23 reviews) from Keighley , 07 May 2013
THIS REVIEW CONTAINS SPOILERS Show review anywayHideI'd enjoyed Limelight, The Kid, Modern Times and the Great Dictator recently. Reviews said this film had killed his career because Americans were wary of his communism and didn't like a black comedy about murder. It was supposed to be highly regarded in France, so I sat down to watch it. Oh deary, deary me. Wooden acting from everyone except Chaplin, sets that looked American filled with extras who looked American, a story that could have been written by a child and Chaplin's pontificating too many times. Best avoided. If you do watch look out for his changing haircolour and , er , that's all.
The Tramp as mass murdererBy a customer from West Midlands , 02 Apr 2012At first watchable, then repetitive, finally silly.
M. Verdoux finds vulnerable women, seduces, robs, and murders them. His character is cold and almost completely merciless (only sparing a pretty young prostitute). Yet he has a human side- he cares for his pretty (disabled) wife and their son. Hey ho. It's The Tramp again with his nauseating, selective sickly sentimentaity, but with nastiness ramped up to murder.
Some commentators have seen M. Verdoux as sympathetic, even loveable. Sure! The film opens with him dancing around, playing with flowers, then within seconds of meeting a stranger, forcing himself on her. The film shows exactly how he carries out his vile work. This is interesting, because Chaplin is so watchable. But it is spoiled when he goes into his Tramp character, as on the boat, when he smirks, crosses his legs, twists his fingers. Presumably this is meant to be endearing- instead he looks a compltete prat.
A weak excuse for his deadly career was that he had lost his job. I wonder how the other millions of unemployed coped? In fact, he showed himself well-organised, ingenious, and bold. He could have set up in business successfully.
There are some amusing uses of funny business. Funny, but out of place.
His final plea in justification of his actions is simply stupid. There is no sense in it whatsoever. Next time you read about a yob beating an old lady, consider what Mr Verdoux wants. He wants us to believe that it is justified because some governments maim and murder on a much larger scale.
A pointless, but memorable, film, mainly because of its novelty, I think.
Overcooked ChaplinBy Leni (179 reviews) from London , 20 Jun 2011There is a strange quality in watching this film, which seems to derive from Chaplin's skill and experience as a silent film actor. His acting, and presumably directing style, never seemed to take on board that sound really meant acting in a different way - less gesture, fewer pratfalls, more reliance on speech to supply the narrative. Hence there is a fussy, overacted quality to Chaplin's performance, but worth watching as a piece of cinema history. It was not a great public success when it was released in 1947, although it was up for an Oscar for best screen play.
excellentBy lesliejung (97 reviews) from london, england , 24 Feb 2010
THIS REVIEW CONTAINS SPOILERS Show review anywayHideit took me a moment to reorient myself to the fact that the little tramp was not a good guy in this one - except that at his trial near the end, his speech made magnificent sense. it is a bit of a cheat, though, i suppose, since all criminals have good reason for their crimes. so fundamentally this is not a hard-headed ethicallly sound message Chaplin is conveying here - but his meticulous and hilarious portrayal of he vicissitudes of male-female relationships when money is at stake is spot on - it is impossible on the other hand not to be disturbed by it all. it perhaps stirs up the melodramatic depths (what depths there are in melodrama! his true love, his wife, even sits in a wheelchair) - so this is like one of those Euripidean tragedies - halfway to comedy and full of psychological nuance all the way. how prescient was chaplin in making this film so many decades before many of the techniques were exploited on television and in film. exceptional and historic film while at the same time being totally engaging and sometimes hilariously funny.
Not What I Expected but Good AnywayBy thomas burgess from basildon , 22 Nov 2005This is the first time I'd seen Chaplin play a baddie. He plays it well and carries with the part a certain charm. You almost like the character. Perhaps it was this film that spawned the idea of silence of the lambs? But this is better. I can't quite work out why. Maybe it's because chaplin was just a genius and great at directing. No doubt some who watch this film will be dissapointed from his break from the norm, but I liked it. It intrigued me. Concentrate when you watch it and you should enjoy it. If you've got kids running around your feet you'll miss what is important about this movie.