-
Essay / Critical Analysis of The Great Dictator
In 1938, the world's most renowned movie star began putting together a film about the beast of the 20th century. Charlie Chaplin resembled Adolf Hitler, to an extent, since Hitler chose a toothbrush mustache similar to that of the Little Tramp. Taking advantage of this resemblance, Chaplin formulates a parody in which the despot and a Jewish barber from the ghetto are confused. The result, released in 1940, was "The Great Dictator," Chaplin's first talking film and the most important work of his career, although it would pose incredible challenges and lead, in a roundabout way, to his long pariah of the United States. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay In 1938, Hitler was not yet seen in all circles as the epitome of horror. Astonishing independent powers in America advocated a non-interference approach to European matters, and rumors of Hitler's strategy to eradicate the Jews were sparked by anti-Semitic rallies. Some of Hitler's most punctual adversaries, remembering their hostility towards the Franco-American volunteers for the Spanish Civil War, were later described as "untimely anti-fascists"; by fighting against despotism while Hitler was still considered a partner, they raised doubts about whether they could be socialists. “The Great Dictator” ended with a long speech rebuking dictatorships and praising democracy and individual opportunity. On the one hand, this sounded like basic American qualities, but to some on the right, it sounded pinko. Chaplin's film, clearly and hatefully pointing at Hitler himself, could simply have been interesting, he says in his collection of memoirs, by chance. that he had not yet understood the extent of the Nazi trick. It appears that the film's Hitler joke was restricted to Spain, Italy and independent Ireland. In any case, in America and elsewhere, it had an effect that today might be difficult to imagine. There has never been a more generally beloved anecdotal character than the Little Tramp, and although Chaplin does not play the Tramp in "The Great Dictator," he simply resembles him, this time not in a comic tale but in a political one. . parody. The plot is one of those mixtures that makes the activity barely conceivable. The legend, a barber officer in World War I, spares the life of a German pilot named Schultz and takes him to safety, all the while, without realizing that he is the adversary. Their accidental arrival leaves the barber with amnesia and for a long time he has no idea of his identity. At that point, he recovers and returns to his barbershop in the nation of Tomania (say it so everyone can hear), just to find that the tyrant Hynkel has taken control, not under the swastika, but under the double cross. His stormtroopers roam the ghetto, breaking windows and rounding up Jews (the phrase “death camp” is used early on, unassumingly). Regardless, the barbershop is saved by the intercession of Schultz, currently an associate clergyman, who remembers him. The barber (never named, just like the Tramp) is in love with the housekeeper Hannah (Paulette Goddard, Chaplin's estranged wife at the time). In addition, he became known thanks to his former neighbors. Regardless, he and the traitor Schultz are eventually placed in inhumane imprisonment, and subsequently, Hynkel has a boating accident, is mistaken for the barber, and locked up in the camp in the same manner as the barber and Schultz escape -with Hynkel's uniform. . Currently, the barber is accepted by everyone as the tyrant. In the exemplary Chaplin tradition, the film has an extravaganza of choking and comic imitation, incorporating Hynkel's famous expressive dance with an enlarged inflatable that makes the globe his toy. This is where five men eat pudding after being told that the person who finds a coin must give their life to kill Hynkel. None of them need to figure out the room and there is cheating, but in the long run – see with your own eyes. Additionally, there is a long, clever scene where the despot of neighboring bacteria, Benzini Napaloni, makes a state visit. Napaloni, clearly demonstrated regarding Mussolini, escapes an attempt to have him sit on a low seat so that little Hynkel can linger on him. Additionally, when they are both sitting on neighboring barber chairs, they alternately siphon their seat higher than the other. There's also a lot of dismay over salvation, and Chaplin intersperses shots of the two despots with newsreels of colossal groups cheering. In 1940, this would have been particularly charged, as Chaplin propelled his comic persona against Hitler in an attempt. , usually successful, to make fun of him as a comedian. Crowds responded unequivocally to the film's humor; he won five Academy Awards, for Picture, On-Screen Character, Supporting Artist, Screenplay and Music. Regardless, viewers then and since have felt that the film was coming to a dead end conclusion when the barber, imitating Hynkel, delivered a monologue lasting more than three minutes that spoke to the barber's own perspectives. Chaplin. to stop the fake “Hynkel”. Chaplin speaks directly to the camera, in his own voice, with no comic contact and with only three cutaways, as the barber is heard on radio all over the world. What he says is authentic enough, but he flattens the satire and some parts of the market talk, followed by a dose of Goddard's conspiracy against the sky, happily facing the hynkel-less future, as the music swells . It didn't work then, and it doesn't work today. It's deadly when Chaplin abandons his comedic persona, unexpectedly changes the tone of the film, and leaves us thinking about how much he's going to talk (a question that should never emerge during a parody). The film feels like a satire carried out by a publication. The film, which was Chaplin's first non-silent film, premiered in 1940 and was the subject of much discussion in Europe. Hitler banned the film in Germany and all affected countries (although he supposedly obtained a copy which he saw twice), and it remained restricted in Spain until Franco threw a kicking off in 1975. In America, regardless, the film enjoyed significant commercial success and was the highest-grossing film of the year, grossing $2 million. Yet many politicians disapproved. When North Dakota Senator Gerald P. Nye, a neutralist, accused Hollywood of making blockbuster films that were propaganda vehicles calling on Americans to embrace war, he referred to The Great Dictator as the one of its two models. Come to think of it, calling The Great Dictator propaganda seems ridiculous, in contrast to World War II hostile fascist propaganda films, all of which spoke of unwavering energy, not an essential human convention, as had Chaplin. Chaplin, in any case, was determined to keep the speech; perhaps this is his explanation behind making the film. He put the Little Tramp and $1.5 million of his money on hold to denigrate Hitler (and.