Acensbart Excellent but underrated film

ThrillMessage There are better movies of two hours length. I loved the actress'performance.

Plustown A lot of perfectly good film show their cards early, establish a unique premise and let the audience explore a topic at a leisurely pace, without much in terms of surprise. this film is not one of those films.

Hayden Kane There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes

Edgar Allan Pooh . . . applies to the 143-second excerpt from the MONSIEUR VERDOUX (1947) feature film that the Criterion Company included on Disc 2 of its GREAT DICTATOR home entertainment release. This bit deals with a stock market crash, and Charlie Chaplin's character--Henri Verdoux--tells his broker, "Sell everything I have AT ONCE!" to which the latter replies, "Are you mad?! You were wiped out hours ago!" Then there's some newsreel footage of a couple World War Two Era dictators, Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini. Among the initial details of the market crash shown here are newspaper headlines, such as this one from Le Figaro: "Stocks Crash: Panic Follows" and another from "L'Humanite: "Banks Fail; Riots Ensue." Then there's some footage of a mob of normal people breaking out the windows of a Fat Cat Bank, and a random Money Mogul about to shoot himself because, as the Holy Bible says, "The love of Money is the Root of All Evil." Another Venal Banker jumps out of a high-rise window. This excerpt ends with the Hitler\Mussolini collage, capped by a "Le Figaro" headline, "Nazis bomb Spanish Loyalists; Thousands of Civilians Killed."

Christopher Reid I was expecting a comedy but this film is a mixture of things. There are some very enjoyable comedic parts and the story itself is somewhat humorous. But many parts and aspects are more dramatic. It's interesting to note that Orson Welles was originally set to direct this movie and wanted to cast Charlie Chaplin. It was then Chaplin who bought the rights, directed and starred in it and introduced the idea of it being a black comedy rather than a serious crime drama.Chaplin looks at the camera a lot. It feels like he's breaking the rules but he gets away with it for some reason. It's like he's watching the movie with us and making fun of the other characters. Everything he does is deliberate. All the delightful facial expressions (fake smiles, looks of romance or confusion or smugness), the comedic pauses, his speaking intonation (he's one of the few silent film stars with a great voice as well) and of course the slapstick falls. One of my favourite parts was when he going to meet with a lady he hadn't seen for a long time and he prematurely flirts with both the house maiden and the lady's friend before finally seeing her.There are some nice details to Monsieur Verdoux's character. He is a vegetarian (as Hitler apparently was) and refuses to hurt animals, even a tiny caterpillar, and yet he is happy to kill adult women for their money. Well, perhaps he is not happy. But he feels it is necessary under the circumstances. Maybe he's putting them out of their misery and making good use of the funds. He seems to partially justify his moral reasoning to himself but he also knows he is not exactly a good man.There is a really nice scene in the middle of the film that changes its trajectory and feeling. Verdoux plans to test a new poison on a woman who ends up being quite interesting. She is not like the other women he meets. She seems down-to-Earth, perhaps hurt or vulnerable. Not a superficial person, someone who really thinks for herself. I was unexpectedly affected when he offered her money and she became emotional. I guess kindness is one of those profound things that can move you whenever it happens.I think I would enjoy Monsieur Verdoux more on a second viewing now that I understand what it is. It's a strange little movie. It raises some interesting moral questions, has a quirky and memorable main character and contains some hilarious moments but also some touching ones. I suppose it's a comedy drama. But the difference isn't always obvious. Perhaps you might laugh when you're not meant to or be affected by something that seems silly. In any case, I'm glad to have made this movie's acquaintance and I did enjoy many parts of it. One idea did resonate with me: that people are often more confronted by a single death than by thousands. Numbers sanctify.

kenjha An unemployed man supports his family by marrying and murdering rich women for their money. Chaplin made only a handful of films after the silent era and this one followed "The Great Dictator" after a seven-year gap, a period over which the great comedian seems to have lost his gift for laughs. Perhaps this was just the result of Chaplin in his autumnal years wanting to do something more substantial, but he seems unsure of whether he's doing comedy or drama. This is the first film in which Chaplin speaks English, but he hardly says anything that is funny. After a slow start, this turns out to be a decent film but it seems the premise had potential for much more humor than is mined here.

dougdoepke A satire on a serial killer is not your everyday movie fare. I can see why audiences of that day were turned off by the Little Tramp's sudden homicidal turn. Of course, it's all treated with a light comedic hand until the moralizing end. Still, Chaplin's subtext comes through clearly at certain points-, such that unemployment can drive men to extremes when they've got a family to support. On the other hand, not every man, of course, turns to fleecing rich widows and then dispatching them in cold-blooded fashion. But that brings him to his second point--- namely "numbers sanctify". Kill one person and you're a murderer; kill a thousand and you're a hero. Here it appears he's referring to the state that historically kills by the thousands in the name of the patriotism. Remember, the movie's coming right after the close of the horrific WWII, and he finds the point ironic.But Verdoux's not through. Capitalism is indirectly indicted for its periodic booms and busts that lead to joblessness, and millions upon millions for munitions manufacturers who prosper during wartime. As for the consolations of religion that come at the end, the gentleman killer appears indifferent without being insulting. Since Chaplin's the sole screenwriter, it's no stretch to believe he's speaking for himself on these matters. Given this rather wholesale indictment of many of the West's leading institutions, small wonder he left the country shortly after under a cloud of controversy.Nonetheless, the movie hits its comedic highpoints with Martha Raye as the loudly vulgar Annabella. Try as he does to do her in, she manages to comically thwart him at every turn. That scene in the fishing boat's a classic. All his polished charm and oily flattery just slide by her obnoxious silliness. Raye makes a perfect foil and an inspired piece of casting.Of course, some of the beguiling Little Tramp remains in Verdoux's character, as when he befriends the penniless girl (Nash), or in that supremely ironic moment when he ambles Tramp-style toward the guillotine. All in all, it's a strange little movie that was apparently shelved for years for obvious reasons. Nonetheless, it was rather gutsy for Chaplin to take such chances with his established character and at Cold War's outset. It's fairly humorous until you think about its serious points, which are still worth pondering.