Reviews on movie The Great Dictator (28)

The Great Dictator is a film by the great American actor Charlie Chaplin, released on October 15, 1940. Chaplin wrote the script for the film, was a director on the set, and also played two main roles in the film. Filming began a week after the declaration of World War II, and the fact that the work saw the light of day, can be called incredible luck. Due to the controversial subject matter and the US position towards Nazi Germany (the countries were still neutral at the time), as well as the unspoken Hollywood rule about the depiction of Jews on the screen, the film could not be released at all. The filming took place in Chaplin’s own studio, which gave the author financial and creative independence.

The film is a political satire mocking the Nazi regime in general and Hitler in particular. Charlie Chaplin plays two roles at once, the dictator of a fictional country Adenoid Hinkel and a Jewish barber who has lost his memory due to trauma and has no idea about the established regime in his country. In the film, innocent situational humor and absurdity are combined with harsh, grotesque ridicule of the Nazis. Among the characters you can see caricatures of Goebbels, Goering and Mussolini. Charlie Chaplin masterfully combines humorous and serious beginnings in his picture.
The film can be divided into two parts. The first one includes a set of short sketches about the barber character. This image of Chaplin, Tramp Charlie, appears in several of the author's films. Because of his naiveté and kind heart, he often becomes involved in absurd and funny situations throughout the film. The first part also includes sketches about Hinkel and the life of the ruling party. They often use black humor, characters who have real prototypes are hyperbolized. But funny episodes are replaced by a demonstration of life in the Jewish ghetto, with which the plot component appears in the film. These shots, even in a comedy film, create an uncomfortable atmosphere, and in another context would be perceived as serious dramatic scenes that can cause tears. The final scene is also capable of upsetting, where through the screen, not the character looks directly into the eyes of the viewer, but Charlie Chaplin himself, trying to reach everyone.
The Great Dictator is Chaplin’s first all-sound film, and the last to feature the character of Tramp Charlie. The film received 6 Oscar nominations, including Best Film and Best Actor.
In the modern film industry, it is not often possible to find films with a good parody. "The Great Dictator" is a classic of cinema, and a good representative of the comedy genre. Many of the techniques and solutions of the scenes used in this film can still be seen on the screens, and they have not become less funny even after 83 years.
The most important thing to understand about this picture - despite the light genre, the film in any case can not be called light. The problems he raises (human cruelty, incompetent people in power, mindless obedience to orders of superiors, the impact of war on people’s lives) remain relevant to this day. The movie still looks good, it doesn’t feel old. Thanks to the variety of humor, each viewer will find a joke that will “go” and a second that will touch.
Maria Mukoseeva

At the beginning of my classic film marathon, I pledged not to watch war movies, but admitted that there would be some exceptions. The first is the Great Dictator.
Charlie Chaplin's first all-sound film and his latest role as Tramp. I missed most of Chaplin's films in my reviews because of the sheer number of them, but I couldn't get past that. This is probably his best work.

It is important to understand that this satire was made not after the end of World War II, when it was clear to everyone what happened and who was wrong, but at the very beginning, when most of the world either supported Hitler or remained neutral, like America. Filming began a week after the outbreak of the War, and by their end half of Europe had already been captured.
This led Chaplin to insert into the last scene a monologue that makes this film great and which, unfortunately, is no less relevant now than then. The whole picture I have talking Chaplin caused dissonance, but on the last stage I realized that otherwise it would not work – there sounds the voice of a real creator and Author with a capital letter.
For this, Chaplin, realizing that he spoke not on behalf of the character, but on his own behalf, was even expelled from the United States, and to make the film available, he spent all his money and went broke. “Hitler must be ridiculed,” he said. It takes a lot of courage, which makes me admire Chaplin even more.
This is probably the only travesty of Hitler in the cinema that Hitler himself saw. It is curious that at a certain point in history two very similar and at the same time very different people came together, who are in the history of great personalities. I was stunned to learn that the resemblance between Chaplin and Hitler was not only in appearance - they were also born relatively close to each other (one in Britain, the other in Austria) in the same year and in the same month with a difference of 4 days!
Sometimes life is amazing: in Europe of the 20th century, 2 people were born almost simultaneously, who wore small mustaches, but one was engaged in great evil, and the other great art. And in this movie, one portrayed the other and the other watched it. It's just genius and villainy.

Of course, the Great Dictator is not a perfect movie. It seemed to me a little protracted (timekeeping exceeds 2 hours, when all the previous works of Chaplin barely reached one and a half), and humor in places primitive. But here, of course, you need to make a big discount on time. And to be fair, for a good half of the film, I still laughed from my heart and sometimes even to my voice. I didn’t think my grandfather’s movie would make me laugh. I doubt that I will review it in its entirety, but some scenes from there are quite.
I can even recommend this to those who do not shy away from old films - believe me, everyone will laugh at some things here. I'm sure Adolf himself couldn't hold back a few laughs while watching.

And this film Chaplin, unlike most of the others, I still give a rating. Not because I have that here seriously evaluate, but rather because I can not get away with a simple tick "viewed" on the KinoPoisk - I want to mark it with an asterisk. And I'll put it on. . .

9 out of 10

Chaplin was right!
The Great Dictator

You have to talk about the sound here. Chaplin, whether you like it or not, whether you agree with me or disagree with me, is an actor (comedian and tragic) of silent cinema. You have to understand that. Even considering the fact that Chaplin shot several sound pictures.

The sound buried many of the greatest silent film actors (for example, Harold Lloyd). Chaplin resisted for a very long time. He himself has repeatedly said that the tramp will die if he speaks. The Great Dictator is Charles Spencer Chaplin’s first sound film. Plus, this is the first film in Chaplin’s career, the timing of which exceeded two hours.
Chaplin was really hard. Watch this movie very carefully. At least the beginning when the barber fights in the war. In some places (literally for a couple of seconds) – the sound disappears, becomes somehow empty in the frame, I don’t know. Although Chaplin throws us very funny gags (many of them will become cult, often will be used in modern comedies).
I am already silent about the topic itself – anti-war movies, a parody of Hitler and his regime. Charles' brother, Sid, shouted with foam at his mouth. Yeah, yeah, no one wants to see a movie like that. I want to! – Charles snapped at the most loved one in his life, with whom he once ran through the garbage when their mother (once again) was taken to the madhouse.
The Great Dictator is the pain and blood of Charlie Chaplin. Therefore, the final speech of the barber knocks to tears. She still fails. I'm washing myself in tears. Chaplin himself killed the vagrant, but he gave hope.
The moviegoers who scold the “Great Dictator” supposedly Spencer is fooling around, but people actually died. What do you mean? By this logic, then “Mr. Pitkin behind enemy lines” is a disgusting movie. “The Great Walk” with Louis de Funes is an abomination. “Life is beautiful” Benigni is disgusting. After all, people died.

Or it is now such a fashion, to criticize the classics, breaking the wall between cinema and real, I am waving my hands. “The Great Dictator” is a brilliant movie that warmed many souls around the world. There are some great magicians here. With a balloon, with a microphone, with the arrival of Napoloni (a parody of Mussolini).
Because of these films, I want to live. To believe in light, in love, in good. Chaplin simply could not be silent, he spoke.
Don't be silent. Be sure to watch it!

9 out of 10

In the courtyard of 1940, the Second World War in full swing, the world is about to be drawn into the Great Patriotic War, while in the United States Charlie Chaplin releases an excellent satire on the political views of fascist Germany. This is a classic film, which at first confuses the selection of two characters, ridicules the clichés of the totalitarian regime and reduces the narrative to a dramatic speech, which is still relevant to this day.
In the spirit of Chaplin, with its inherent tone of comedy, the film begins with the First World War, showing the main character (one of the two). The character evokes laughter, the fighting and tactics of the soldiers are all embellished with Chaplin’s activities, which leads to the most comical situations. The whole story includes the adventures of this military man, who again meets interesting people, thereby giving the viewer fascinating shots.

The exhibition set a look at the main character, and in the meantime, time passes. Adenoid Hinkel comes to power in Germany - that's where Chaplin's satire shoots. The actor embodied on the screen two different people who are on opposite sides of the barricades. The viewer begins to follow the story of a former soldier turned barber who turns out to be a Jew. At the same time, Hinkel’s rule and views are ridiculed. Chaplin does not just ridicule the leader, but parody to the smallest detail, playing comedy on the status of a dictator.
The fate of the two characters does not overlap, but subjectively these people are interdependent. The Barber's Romantic Line and the Dictator's Aggressive Methods. In this vein, the film moves to the dramatic part. It is striking how the authors, implying all the consequences of Hinkel’s formation, are able to give comic situations. Cases with plans to take over the world, with a meeting with an ally, with hidden plans for Aryan blood.
The film does not explain the presence of the same person, which is why crazy theories are born referring to the possible consequences of the First World War. But when the characters are connected by secondary personalities, then all the irony of the director is visible. The picture perfectly crosses the genres of comedy and tragedy (as a symbol of masks in ancient theater). The radical measures of the dictator are accompanied by his dances with a ball-globe, the romance of the barber closely clashes with the guerrilla movement. Funny and intriguing.

At this rate, the “Great Dictator” gives a pleasant climax. You can already see how the situation will go, but it is fascinating to watch. The ending of the tape gets goosebumps. Very exciting and sad Chaplin speaks to the world. You don't expect such an outcome, since the tape played on balancing brutal consequences and ridiculing historical facts. Chaplin’s parody made it possible to laugh where darkness and anguish are oppressing in ordinary films. An alternative future that proves that people should be happy and reasonable.
Perhaps Chaplin was throwing this picture as a sign of unification, as a message to all people to be kinder. Guys, let's live together! An interesting picture that surprises, shocks and touches the heart.

As children, we were all told not to hurt the weak and help others. But do you believe in these principles? I am increasingly aware that this is not the case.

These ideals are in every accomplished hero. Therefore, stories like Gantz, with an angry and resentful protagonist, feel very fresh and unusual. And if you keep talking about Gantz, as the plot progresses, you can see how Kay changes and acquires these values. This does not seem to be fake, and the reader begins to share them with the hero.
Something similar can be found in the movie The Great Dictator. With such a difference that all thoughts fall out in 3:30, not 383 chapters, and the whole humanistic message was in one monologue.
Moreover, the barber performed by Charlie Chaplin expresses his thoughts in words. This seems appropriate in literature, but not in movies. Cinema is a visual art form and thoughts should be expressed visually. So this monologue should feel very out of place, especially given the film's scarcity of dialogue. So how does this speech look so organic and not even notice? In his book The School of Literary Skills, Jürgen Wolff talked about the problem of exposure and how to get rid of it: Give information in emotional scenes. Emotional moments of the narrative will hide the fact that you are reporting some information. We still get a lot of information, but the emotional rise of the scene hides it. That's how it works. The speech at the end of the film evokes a fountain of emotions, creating a climax, hiding such an unprofessional moment of storytelling.
The speech works by itself, and you don't have to watch the rest of the movie, but I'd like to say a few words about how everything before the monologue gives meaning to the words at the climax and what's interesting about it.

This monologue is a joke: a funny barber comes out and gives a serious speech, and these are not the words you would expect from a dictator. But the interesting thing about it, after the message, of course, is that it's a plot twist. MovieScience talked about this type of twist, which is Anagnorizis. And the difference with the usual twists here is that the viewer does not recognize something that surprises him, the character makes a much more important discovery for himself. He discovers something from head to toe that upends his paradigm and understanding of things he was previously certain of.
After the war, the barber becomes an enemy to his own state, for which he fought. He becomes a witness to the persecution of Jews, considered genocide, he was almost hanged on a lamppost for resisting arrest, not to mention getting into a concentration camp. What happened, roughly the same as the protagonist of Clockwork Orange, the overabundance of violence disgusts him. As one veteran YouTube psychologist put it, “There is no greater pacifist than a man who has gone through war.”
The barber's monologue is very capacious and involves a lot of ideas, and I don't want to go through it. You have to think about it yourself. To me, the most powerful thing that kills the personal perception of art is the thoughts of others. This is how I reacted to this monologue.

When I first heard this speech, I connected it to our culture, history and art in a second, and all the facts started to be remembered and connected. For example, I began to fully understand songs like Anthrax - Antisocial, Suicidal Tendencies - Institutionalized, Metallica - Disposable Heroes (and in principle the entire Master Of Puppets album) and many others that touch on politics and human society. This reaction is due to the fact that I was given the root cause of what is sung in these songs. This leads me to one thing.

Even though we are taught these values from early childhood, they do not work. Why didn’t I understand all the songs I was listening to? Why does the monologue give me new ideas? That’s why I think I’ve lost my humanity. The humanity that Charlie Chaplin gave me back.
And after the emotional shock that made me cry every time I watched the speech, I'm sad that some people see only the polito, in his words. Seeing the derogatory comments under the post with a video excerpt from the film, I wanted to smear them from head to toe for insulting the film, but all my anger instantly became bitter because they are defended by the one they criticize.

By 1940, Charles Spencer Chaplin was already incredibly popular around the world, fabulously rich, independent of any film studios, and had several shot masterpieces of silent cinema, such as “City Lights” and “New Times”. Many people consider The Great Dictator to be the apotheosis of Chaplin’s work and his strongest film, but I find it difficult to agree with this.

Viewed as a challenge, as a satirical utterance, and as a gauntlet, it is one of the boldest and most powerful films in the history of cinema. To do this with a living Hitler, with Nazism gaining momentum, with neutral relations between Germany and the United States, is the height of courage and it is really an act of a great man. Chaplin, as it is now fashionable to say, mercilessly roasted Hitler, Mussolini and the whole regime. Moreover, there is no incredible fiction and fantasy in the film, Chaplin rather simply exaggerated and parodied: the Nazis are exposed as cruel, angry and power-hungry idiots, and this is not far from the truth.
But still do not forget that this is a full-length film, not a political note, and in the artistic component of the "Dictator" came out much weaker than its predecessors: it is far from so funny, the elements of silent cinema no longer look on sound film, and the plot as if not very neatly strung on the basic idea of the similarity of Hitler and the Jewish barber, and thereby fades into the background. And in general, how right is it to make a comedy about such events and to shoot humorous sketches of the German abuse of Jews in the ghetto and concentration camps? The Maestro later admitted that he would never have made the film if he had known the horrors of World War II. In fact, he became a hostage of his own insight and talent and unwittingly made fun of the main tragedy of the XX century.
In any case, for all the pros and cons, “The Great Dictator” is a huge layer in the history of cinema: it is perhaps the most famous political and military satire, it is a brilliant scene with the globe, it is Chaplin’s first fully sound film and the last appearance on the screen of the “little tramp”. After all, he had to remain silent for more than 20 years to finally give such a life-affirming and soulful speech.
8 out of 10

Contrary to expectations, "The Great Dictator" didn't impress me as much on the big screen as "City Lights" - something seemed outdated, something straightforward, something exaggerated. However, for his time with the living Hitler to remove such a picture was a fearless step, because the "Great dictator" - first of all a political statement and only then - a tragicomedy and a work of art. Chaplin, as in “Monsieur Verdu”, it was important to speak about the sore, say valuable things for his viewer, and only then – to cheer and touch.
In comparison with the unconditional artistic refinement and impeccability of the “Big City Lights” in the “Great Dictator” there are shortcomings and even miscalculations, both in style and conceptual plan. First of all, this is Chaplin’s attempt to adapt the techniques of silent cinema to sound (in “New Times” it still worked, because the characters were silent, the mechanisms spoke for them), a certain stiltness of the image of Hinkel, an attempt to simultaneously ridicule him and make him look like a monster. Chaplin’s miscalculation is that humor always humanizes and the ridiculed is sympathetic, unless we are dealing with harsh grotesque and sarcasm (as in Ferreri’s films, for example).
For this reason, Hinkel is humanized by Chaplin’s good humor, his sinister actions and words (even in the brilliant scene with a balloon globe) do not look so terrible, because the hero is simply ridiculous and pathetic. Because, whatever Krakauer said, Chaplin’s cartoon did not damage Hitler’s image much, although pompous tyrants should still be ridiculed, even if it turns out unsuccessfully. But the satire on Mussolini and the scenes with the participation of two announcers succeeded the director to fame, this is a real triumph of the burlesque! Due to the seriousness of the message, Chaplin almost completely abandoned the romantic, love line, because the film is devoid of sentimentality.

In "The Great Dictator" there are no scenes that could touch, everything here is subordinated to the tasks of political satire - a genre in which Chaplin has never worked before, a certain paleness of the film, its polemical focus against Nazism and totalitarianism, easy readability behind the pitiful characters of real prototypes (especially Chaplin succeeded in buffoon Goering and the sinister Goebbels - in his opinion, a genuine architect of Hitler's atrocities), a certain pallor, the secondary line of the barber (acious dictator) makes a somewhat lively and dynamic part of this large city.
The opposition of the dictator and the “little man” is a direct dispute with the Nietzschean ethics of Hitlerism, the cult of the superman, but both Hinkel and the Jewish barber are equally humanized by humor, although Chaplin pursued other goals – to ridicule the former and kindly laugh at the latter. In “The Great Dictator” there is too much comic and at the same time serious (the final monologue of the barber, in which Chaplin put his views, gradually begins to resemble Hinkel’s speech – it is difficult to say whether against the will of the director or because of it, but the defense of democracy can also lead, according to Chaplin, to dictatorship, which McCarthyism proved), but at the same time there is no romance, without which Chaplin previously could not do, achieving a fusion of sentimental, dramatic and comic.

In any case, delving into the shortcomings of this remarkable and necessary picture, denouncing totalitarianism and defending humanism, should not prevent its perception. There are few such pictures in which the director’s worldview appears in such a frank rejection of evil and protection of humanity. Especially in this era of contempt for the “little people” and the revival of Nietzscheanism. Charlie, forgive us for not learning anything!

The picture, completely different from the early works of Chaplin, put the final point in relation to the Tramp - a character who has become a real legend in the era of film development and perspective. And, admittedly, the aftertaste after viewing remains too difficult to analyze.
Initially, the satirical and political sketch, not characteristic of the whole work of Charles, assumed only a mockery of the dictatorship, making real clowns of the main antagonists (veiling the whole thing very “fat”).
Gradually, with the development of the plot, where the character of Chaplin plays two completely polar roles, all the humor begins to acquire a very “sharp” shade, which subsequently caused indignation among many viewers and critics: shootings, concentration camps, crazy rulers with their “wanters” turn into a rather gloomy and cruel reality. Of course, despite his undisputed talent in acting and directing, the creator of the film could not look so far ahead, but despite many factors, “The Great Dictator” became a banner film, whether the author wanted it or not. Such is the role and curse of a real creator - never guess whether the crowd will kiss you next time or stick a knife in the back.
But without a doubt, wading through these “political wilds”, the Master comes to a stunning finale, which may look like an excuse, but the sincerity of the last words of the Tramp can not be denied. This point turned out to be very expressive, emotional and, quite possibly, delineating under a bold line all that Chaplin aspired to all the twenties. Utopian? Yeah. But still.
8 out of 10

Tramp Charlie lived in the cinema for 27 years. During this time, almost everyone in the world loved this character. This hero was supposed to live forever, but unfortunately, all good things come to an end. Thus, the last film of Charles Chaplin, in which he used his immortal image of the vagrant Charlie, is the picture “The Great Dictator”.
Taking advantage of the fact that the character of the tramp and Adolf Hitler are similar (especially by his mustache), Chaplin could not help but make a satirical film about the founder of National Socialism. I must say that this picture is perhaps the most daring in the work of Chaplin, because it ridicules not only the Fuehrer, but also his other associates: Goebbels, Goering. Also presented in a funny way and Benito Mussolini.
I especially want to highlight two scenes of the film that I think are brilliant. The first scene is Hinkel's inflatable globe dance. Under the beautiful overture to the opera Lohengrin, the dictator then smoothly shifts the model of the Earth from hand to hand, then quietly kicks him. But at the end of the dance, Hinkel hugs the ball too hard, which eventually bursts. In one scene, Chaplin was able to show what would have happened if Hitler had taken over the world. If he had mastered the globe, he would destroy it, believing that all his actions were correct. The second scene is the barber's speech. And frankly, it's the best speech a man could ever write. Chaplin in the form of a barber says the most correct words. The Brotherhood of Man and the Struggle for a Just Peace.
The Great Dictator is one of Charles Chaplin’s finest films, and the final speech is the best speech in cinema history. And I would like everything that the genius of film art said in it to come true, because all this is in our power.
10 out of 10

About

It is likely that if the film “The Great Dictator” were filmed (but carried) in our time, then the god-awful jokes about toilets and feces would take place in the film of that name. But as they say and really passed, because at one time the talented, and now we can safely say – the great Charles Chaplin. The film is a very bold attempt to show Nazi Germany when Adolf Hitler was in power. The tape is devoid of vulgar jokes, and she does not need it, enough of those episodes where Hitler behaves like a hysterical woman. Oh, sorry, he's not Hitler in the movie, he's Adenoid Hinkel. As the credits say, “All coincidences with real names are accidental.” So all the Adenoids are not bothered.

The barber and Hinkel

It would seem to be the same mustache, the same person, but Charles Chaplin made his characters completely different. If the Jewish barber is naive, kind, but brave, Adenoid Hinkel is the exact opposite. And does it make sense to describe Charlie Chaplin’s second character, if everyone knows who his archetype is? But there is one similarity between the two characters – both can cause a smile and laughter. If we laugh at the barber and nod his head approvingly, then over the actions of Adenoid Hinkel we will hold on to his stomach at all, remember at least the scene with the bulletproof vest. These are fun characters and a fun movie. Why in moderation? Still, it is filmed on a dangerous topic, even Charles Chaplin admitted that if he knew what the Germans were doing in concentration camps, he would refrain from the Great Dictator project.
A dangerous topic

If a film of this kind was directed by Rowan Atkinson, it would be almost a hundred percent punctured somewhere, probably not even in talent, but in the manner of telling stories about the war, and even more difficult when the story of people, weapons and persecution should be satire. Charlie Chaplin always had something more than humor and crookedness, the actor and director was able to show everything so competently that censorship could not argue with him for a long time. We, the audience, will be able to understand when to laugh, and when to shut up and start thinking, and for this it is absolutely not necessary to laugh. We'll figure it out. Also, the situation is saved by the presence of chemistry between the barber and Hannah - such a light love line gives rise to dramatic events and food for dooms. It's okay when it's literate. And when a talented director is behind the wheel, everything will work out. How many years have passed since the release of the film - it does not matter, the issues that were touched there are burning and now.
Speech

And how curiously "The Great Dictator" begins, as if during the timekeeping a ridiculous comedy will be shown, but everything went wrong. The closer the viewer is to the denouement of events, the more minor. It is no longer very comforting that this is obviously comedic satire. If you think about it, is it a comedy? Hardly. Comedy is just the shell of this film, and much deeper hidden vinegar. The film was nominated for five Academy Awards, but here’s what’s amazing. Wasn't the barber's Adenoid Hinkel speech worth at least one? There was so much truth in the words of the Little Dictator. This is a movie from Chaplin Studios. And we can safely say that this film is a masterpiece, and if not, it is very close to this definition.

On the one hand, the film is really good. As a political satire, as an attempt to stir up the audience and look at a topical topic. To ridicule evil is really a very good way to fight it, in any case, laughing at evil helps not to go crazy when life is hard. However...

However, this is no longer funny, unfortunately. Because Chaplin later admitted that he would not have made such a film if he knew about the real situation in Germany. And the film stops being funny when you know what happened to the Jews, the Russians, the Gypsies, the German Communists and all the rest of them.
Sometimes the attempt to laugh at evil - even very talented - looks frankly unsuccessful. And with all due respect to Chaplin, this is exactly what it is. One can often hear rave reviews from critics: “Laughter conquers evil – a great dictator is defeated by a great comedian.” I'm sorry, it's really cringing. The year the film was made is 1940. Hitler did not even notice that he was defeated and continued to conquer Europe with all his might.
In general, the film is certainly brilliant, but it looks too sad now. And this is not to say in detail that the bad taste in the gags is enough: a “live” microphone, a ball-globus game, not funny (especially now) jokes about poison gas and, sorry, frankly spitting the ending (the horror of the fridge: the hairdresser was probably killed after such an “inspiring” speech).
5 out of 10

And that out of respect for "old age" and Chaplin style, which is certainly recognizable.

Chaplin has long resisted sound in movies. The first sound film was released in 1927, they began to prevail in the early 30s, but Chaplin only in the 36th year introduces individual sound elements in his work ("New Times). The Great Dictator was the first fully sound film. And at the same time the last, in which Chaplin used the glorified, but no longer relevant image of the vagrant Charlie. The comedies have moved away from the naive gag slapstick, in which the protagonist was a small man, and Chaplin (reluctantly) admits it. At the same time, the comic effect of the film as a whole is achieved by the previously experienced (for example, in “The City Lights”) mixing of different images – in this case, images of the timid Jewish barber and the “great” dictator Hinkel. So from an artistic point of view, this film, perhaps, differs from the previous Chaplin’s work less than the next ones.
The director's interest in social drama is also not new; he first addresses it back in his early 20s. The previous film, New Times, was imbued with the pathos of soulless capitalism, but politics was not part of that pathos. The Dictator is primarily a political manifesto, illustrated with pictures of the influence of the political on the social. Beginning with completely slapsticky scenes (which could have been part of a silent film without change) of a war in which the common man looks out of place, to put it mildly, Chaplin turns to criticism of fascism. His satire was very bold, especially by the standards of the then USA (to Casablanca another 2 years!). While the appropriateness of laughing at the ideological component of fascism is no longer in question, the right to laugh at the persecution of Jews is still debated. Life is Beautiful (1997) caused a wave of outrage. What can I say if even “Schindler’s List” was criticized at one time for the very artistic depiction of the Holocaust.
Of course, Chaplin himself did not know what was happening in Germany. But even his naive glance is enough to understand the ludicrous narcissism of dictators and the senseless pretentiousness of Nazism, very accurately noted in the barber’s conversation with Schultz:
- I always thought you were a real Aryan. - I'm a vegetarian.

It's also a brilliant scene with a balloon globe that can't stand dictatorial power. Chaplin believes in the power of authority and his voice: in the scene of the beginning of the Jewish pogroms, the barber reacts vividly to the speech of Hinkel, whose roars cannot but frighten the unfortunate little man. the final speech ends with stormy applause, no different from applause to the real dictator. And this fact, like Wagner’s Lohengrin, which played in the scene with dreams of dictatorship over the whole world, makes the finale not so bright, and the belief in positive change in society is not so strong. Or is it just that Wagner is loved by both Aryans and vegetarians?

Charlie Chaplin's classic 1940 movie. Political satire on Nazism and dictators of totalitarian regimes.

The film begins during the First World War. A young Jewish barber fights for his country, Tomania. During one of the battles, he saves the life of pilot Schultz, but he himself receives a serious injury and falls into a coma for 20 years. The war is over, the time for change has come. The country is ruled by the great dictator Adenoid Hinkel, who hates Jews and wants to enslave the whole world, and he looks like a barber like two drops of water. While Hinkel comes up with plans to capture a neighboring country, the barber tries to restore his former life, along the way getting acquainted with the girl Hannah, with whom he will plunge into the whirlpool of incredible events.

The historical significance of the Great Dictator cannot be overstated. This is Charles Chaplin's first voice-activated film, and is widely believed to be his political manifesto. The release of the film was accompanied by a number of difficulties, since the United States in 1940 still adhered to neutrality in relations with the Reich, but the film was shown on the big screen anyway, and was a great success. In addition, the film was shown in London during the Battle of Britain, accompanying the raising of morale among soldiers and citizens, constantly subjected to German bombing.

During the war, many anti-Nazi films were produced, but Chaplin’s work stands out from them. You need to be a very talented person to be able to qualitatively show the important problems of society, while keeping people in a good mood. To expose the vices of dictators, which they so carefully disguise behind their pompous speeches, and embody them in acting. This is the character of the “Great Dictator.” As I wrote above, it displays problems, hinting at ways to solve them, while not driving the audience into despair, but on the contrary, encouraging. That’s why this film was shown during the Battle of Britain, and that’s why it raised people’s spirits and morale. This is the genius of Chaplin, which many unfairly vilify.
By the way, irony we can observe in the description itself: the great Aryan leader of the leading nation of superhumans in the bright future can not be distinguished from the “dirty rat” and “smelling Jew” barber, whose inner world is by the way much richer than Hinkelsky.
In Hannah’s speeches, from the first minutes of her appearance in the film, we see Chaplin’s call to unite against the Nazi threat, and we see the same dedication in other heroes. The problem of law enforcement agencies turning into an apparatus of coercion and violence in a totalitarian state is disguised in the film as a comic fight between a barber and a Nazi officer. The poor man calls the police for help and says he wants to sue the officer for insults, but the irony is that he is humiliated by those who are supposed to protect him. And here there is no just justice and just laws, just as there is no freedom and justice in general.
The culmination of the work, of course, is Chaplin’s final speech. A speech that caused so much controversy. But if we discard Charles’ left-wing ideas, which were far from leading in his statement, we will see that the main thing was to call people to kindness. The usual good, which in the 20th century we all forgot. Dictators turned personalities into killing machines. Machines that destroy the freedom and lives of millions. Machines fighting for the imaginary common good. A good thing that will never come is a blatant deception. As long as we are human, we will remain human. People who won't let bloody dictators mix us with dirt. He says not to give up and fight. But to fight not for dictators, but to fight for freedom, because it is above all else. No more deified tyrants, no more despotism, no more genocides, no more shootings, only democracy and life! And the future victory of the anti-Hitler coalition will confirm his words.
I am referring to you, dear readers. Please don't

Do not see the militaristic, pseudo-patriotic speeches of politicians, this is one big fraud. Preserve the freedom and spirit of democracy. What happened in the twentieth century cannot be repeated. And as Chaplin said, don't forget you're human, not machine.

I do not know how it is right to get acquainted with the work of Charlie Chaplin, the maestro of silent black and white cinema, from the film, where for the first time just appeared sound and speech, the viewer, 76 years after the release, but it is definitely worth it. To some extent, the film "The Great Dictator" is very heavy, despite all its humor, which will not be understood by everyone. Everything would be so funny if it weren't so catastrophically awful in real life. And begging for all the despotism of Nazi culture, making satire on it, is simply unthinkable boldly at the time. Unsurprisingly, Charlie Chaplin wouldn’t have quietly parodied Adenoid Hinkel, knowing years later the war horrors he was waging. Surprisingly, in Russia in the open release it appeared only in 2004, while in the United States already in the year of release was a success. Most likely, a person who knows history and political nuances, this picture will be understandable, and taken very seriously, despite the fact that it is shot in a comedy genre.
The plot is very simple. For two hours, we see the brilliant acting and reincarnation of the director, screenwriter and main character – Charles Chaplin from a great leader to an ordinary barber, who lost his memory during the fall of the plane with the pilot Schultz (Reginald Gardiner). Definitely, the absurdity of the massacre from the first shots is shown, when an ordinary person cannot fight, and running among the trenches, and under fire does not understand what to do. So it was so easy for him to get on a plane or get up to the machine gun if he was ordered. "Of course, I should." Finding himself in the future without memory, he returns to the barberhouse, sincerely not understanding why the soldiers are taking risks on his windows: a Jew and trying to somehow prevent it. Going back to the humor of those years, we must understand that the paint poured on a person, the blow to the head with a pan, the throwing of food at each other, the fact that the hero slipped - all this is funny and the person who sits on the other side of the screen should laugh like a winded up dummy. But, for me personally, the value is military satire, the urgency of what is shown and said, in the intervals between absurd scenes. Humor will certainly save the world, but truth must inspire people not to be fooled by dictators and the government. Two hours, with big breaks in time, it's hard to sit out because the movie is boring for our time. But, for true moviegoers, these two hours are really worth it to wait for the final speech, about which there is so much talk and noise.
Key and prominent figures. Henkel ("dictator of the fictional Tomania"), who spoke constantly, and everyone listened and clapped him. His henchmen, Garbitsch (Henry Daniell), and the sycophant general, with their stupid ideas, have real prototypes. And while the dictator squirts from his mouth, making incomprehensible speeches, for those around us who have a bright emotional color, in parallel, we see a small man fighting the injustice of the military dictatorship. The same Hannah, who is hardworking and good-looking, cannot live in good conditions and find a job because she is persecuted. Once again, it is advised to the common people to unite against the absurd rulers who, like small children, divide the Earth among themselves, throwing it like a balloon, and deciding the fate of people. Whether it is Napoloni (dictator of Bacteria), before whom Heinkel trembles, wanting to appear higher, more significant, holding in fear the whole state. For them to withdraw, to send troops, to destroy someone's house - it's just a child's fun, like waving a stick of sausages in front of each other, or throwing pasta around each other. It is not surprising that such a giant of the film industry, who made a whole generation of black and white cinema, put in his word so that ordinary people do not lose their spirit in difficult times and believe in a bright future.

"Hannah, can you hear me?" Wherever you are, the clouds will clear and the sun will look out. We will emerge from the darkness. Come on. We'll live in a new world. Good, where there will be no place for human hatred, greed and cruelty. Look at Hannah, the human soul is given wings and we can fly. Climb the rainbow, be in the light of hope, a future that belongs to you, me and all of us.

The most unique thing about the film is that the cruel tyrant is shown as a jester. It's a joke I'm afraid of. How it was in the movie and how it really was. In fact, Hitler had an army that kept all of Europe at bay; in the film, Ginkel had a ridiculously miserable army, with planes colliding with each other in a parade, not at the front. There is also a scene in the film where he tries to inspire greatness by making his seat higher. But he couldn't. The scene screams ' the higher your nose, you will not become great!' The film, like ' Kid' contains the result of karma. If in ' Baby' a woman doing good to the needy finds her son, in ' The Great Dictator' a barber in war saves a pilot who, during the tyranny over the Jews, helps him and his friends. There is also a point where Ginkel shows how low he is, that even his own words are not true and also mercantile. This shows the scene where he left the Jews alone for a while, only to have a rich Jew lend him money for the war. Hitler would have turned over in his grave.
As for the barber, this is a simple man. Good-natured Jew. In addition, a man in love, who had already been at war, saw explosions and deaths, lost his memory because of the war and almost lost his hairdresser. Because of the tyranny of the fascists, he is on the run, his friends and his lover are at risk. He is a man who can be called a victim of war and tyranny. The film causes laughter to the final remark of the hairdresser who was mistaken for Ginkel, since the external similarity is one hundred percent. The final line still brings tears. The remark, like the whole film, calls for democracy, or more simply peace. The picture as such calls not to be afraid of dictators, not to try to surpass others, to live amicably and to love, calls for peace. Let us return to Chaplin’s final remark. Thanks to this very line, this film is still alive, although Chaplin himself is long dead, but if you think about it, you can say that he is dead, because his ideas still live in his films. In films, it remains relevant, because these films call for being more human, without imposing and without gravity. His films are easy to perceive because they remain in the memory for a long time, and most importantly in the heart.

There is no doubt that Charlie Chaplin is an epochal figure in the art of cinema, and his films are timeless and forgetful, but I do not consider it necessary to devote my reader to the chronicle of his memorable life, to praise his vast merits and achievements, and to do everything else that every reviewer who relates to the famous figure considers his duty. Everyone here will do it much better than me, so I just have to share my modern, as possible, objective view of the film of the past era.
First of all, the film itself is nothing more than a parody of the dictatorship of fascism by a contemporary of its inception. There is really no more to add here.

The first thing that a person like me, who has almost no experience of watching such an old movie, can notice is the perfection of its presentation. The film is flawless in its production and is perceived as no worse than modern cinema; there is no such thing as “old-fashioned shooting” and no reason to justify the performance of the film by the age of its creation. “Dictator” looks easy and modern, with a pleasant direction, a good angle, a very cute acting, this is not a movie to which one should show condescension due to his age, on the contrary, this work looks quite decent in the quality of shooting today.
Even though it is technically excellent, the film has flaws. And almost all of them are based on the plot and its implementation in the frame. It’s a damning pity, but the script “Dictator” remained at the dawn of cinema, having a completed, but indistinctly told story. It turned out that the characters of this film, in general, who managed to open up and cause an audience attitude, are almost unnecessary to the film itself. Despite the fact that all the attention of the picture is riveted to the characters, their roles are precipitous and unfinished, even completely meaningless - they are no more than the scenery necessary to outline the author's plan. In general, we can even say that the main character is needed here only to read the speech that ends the film, since the excess of his persona in the frame, not counting purely comedic moments, does not contribute to the film. This film is just a parody, trying to bear some kind of morality, not telling the story, but only showing its funny vision of the object under observation, mixing miniatures in which, except for the similarities with real prototypes, there is nothing else. Against this background, the seriousness and cordiality of the closing speech look strikingly wrong, because there is nothing in the story shown that could entail such reasoning, conclusions, morality. “The Dictator” is just a collection of funny cartoons that tried to tie together the plot, but nothing happened. Of course, this is a comedy and it is primarily fun, but the jokes here are often the same type, purely parody, and the film itself, you can see that it is trying to be something more. Instead of the present story, an installation of jokes of a Jew on the fascists was obtained, hardly revealing anything more than the insignificance and irrationality of the leaders of this regime.
It could be a big, epic movie, but it's just another little funny comedy.

Of course, if I had known then about the true horrors of the German concentration camps, I could not have made The Dictator, could not have laughed at the Nazis, at their monstrous mania of extermination.
Charlie Chaplin, 1964

The idea of the picture originated with Charles Chaplin in 1939, when many did not consider Hitler a real threat to the entire population of the Earth. But the filming process began on the ninth day of World War II, and the end of the work coincided with the Nazi invasion of France. In this regard, Chaplin changes the final speech, exposing the real fascist - Hitler (already in his own name).
It was Chaplin who was the first who honestly, directly, without hiding anything, dug deep in search of the causes of World War II. He spoke harshly, causticly, but as truthfully as possible about what others were afraid to even think about. In my opinion, VD is the most powerful anti-fascist picture, which without blood, atrocities and torture conveys the horror of Hitlerite fascism. It is not surprising that at that time "VD" is banned in all occupied countries. Only in 1945 in France, in 1975 in Spain and only in 1989 in the USSR, the viewer saw the picture on the wide screen (in the Union, the premiere was timed to the opening of the Moscow Cinema Museum).
So what is the courage and genius of Chaplin’s “Dictator”?
The script is great, simple, easy, funny, but at the same time with an original, clearly verified idea, which makes it almost perfect. There is no pathos, no scarcity of plot, no protractedness.

Chaplin himself, incomparably, played two roles at once: the heartless and cruel Hitler (shown from such a angle that it is incomprehensible to the mind what courage it takes to play like this!) and the Jewish hairdresser (naive, so humane and similar to each of us). His game is brilliant! The brilliant depiction of Hitler and the dialogues, which are stunning in their subtlety and accuracy, make us treat Mr. Chaplin with great respect. And the final monologue ... - the monologue is no longer the hero of the picture, but Chaplin himself - the monologue is sharp, sharp, powerful! Speech of a person who believes in a just, honest world.
Is it worth watching the two-hour VD today?
Definitely yes! Because it's a film about freedom, justice, equality, courage, brotherhood. The film is about the fate of Man and humanity, about hope and faith in a bright future, about stability and its absence. The film is about our past and, who knows, our future. The film is bright, relevant, strong, bold and so necessary – necessary today.

The wonderful anti-war comedy of the great Charlie Chaplin is a comedy for all time, with brilliant, sparkling humor, in its own naive and funny, but at the same time honest, sad and tragic. Personally, she caused a huge range of emotions from laughter to sadness.
One of the main tasks of Chaplin in this film is to show the catastrophe of a global scale through the prism of humor. And in my opinion, he did just fine. Unique style, stunning, memorable scenes (for example, a dictator’s dance with a globe), showing us the essence of fascism and beautifully selected music (Hungarian Dance No. 5) Johann Brahms, Wagner’s overture Lohengrin – all this makes the film unique and memorable. In his autobiography, Chaplin writes: “Of course, if I had known then about the true horrors of the German concentration camps, I could not have made The Dictator, I could not have laughed at the Nazis, at their monstrous mania of extermination.”

In this film, we saw one small man, a simple barber, defy the horrors of war with his deep, heartfelt speech, making us think about important things like freedom, peace, love, equality. This speech is the true anthem of democracy. In The Great Dictator, Chaplin, taking risks (making a picture was dangerous at the time), inspires people with his humor. Hitler had to be ridiculed, and Charlie Chaplin succeeded. Thank you so much for the wonderful film.

8 out of 10

Behind the image of a ridiculous vagrant, Charles Chaplin hid a complex man filled with desires, ambitions and contradictions. For him it was painfully important not just to joke, but to raise pressing questions, to reflect through his comedy the unnaturalness of the vices of the external world. He was one of the first directors who not only decided to make a film about Nazism (and I do not count here documentary films of the one-name-who-you-don't even want to-name the "Triumph of the Will"), but to do it in America far from Europe in the genre of ridiculing the Fuehrer.
He was discouraged, promised bankruptcy and the complete collapse of his entire career. In the end, this film really was the beginning of the end of his successful life, because you can break the rules up to a certain point. But he did important things for himself and all this only adds to his greatness.
In addition, the value of this film is that it was the first sound movie Chaplin! He was so afraid that the tramp would die at the first word he spoke that he fought against sound by all means, but he decided! And that's very important. If it weren’t for that determination, we wouldn’t have had his closing speech, which is why this movie is worth watching. There is not a word about Nazism in it, but every word is alive to this day and carries a true understanding of how our lives should be arranged (read at the end, watch the movies).
To be honest, the film itself seemed to me weaker than “Baby” or “City Lights”, where, I think, there was more subtle and touching Chaplin’s style. These films could capture attention from the first frame and not let him go until the last tears of the finale. And in "The Great Dictator" many scenes are frankly boring and predictable. They are diluted with brilliant fragments, but do not create the feeling of a whole masterpiece. And if it were not for the culmination of the final speech, it might have passed completely by. But combined with the facts of struggle, ideas and creation, this is definitely a movie worth spending 2 hours on. And don’t forget to save his speech somewhere, so that in moments of arrogance, hatred or emptiness, you know where to read a human prayer about the main thing, along with the song Imagine by John Lennon.
Speech:

I don't want to be an emperor, that's not my goal. I do not want to rule or conquer anyone, I want to help everyone: Jews, the disadvantaged, black and white.
We all want to help each other, that’s how people are made. We want to live and enjoy the happiness of our neighbor, not his sorrow. We don’t want to hate and despise each other. There's enough room in this world for everyone. Our good land is fertile - it will easily feed us all. Life may be free and beautiful, but we have lost our way. Greed has poisoned the souls of people, divided the world with hatred, plunged us into suffering and bloodshed.
We were all speeding up, but we locked ourselves in a dungeon. The machines that give us abundance have left us in need. Our knowledge has made us cynical, our prudence has made us cold and cruel. We think too much and feel too little. We need humanity more than machines and more than judgment, we need kindness and gentleness. Without these qualities, life will become one violence, and then everything will perish.
Airplanes and radios reduced the distance. The very nature of these discoveries demands kindness from man, calls for universal brotherhood, for the unity of all men on earth. And even now, my voice reaches the ears of millions around the world, millions of desperate men, women and young children, the unfortunate victims of a system that forces the torture and imprisonment of the innocent.

To those who can hear me, I say, “Do not despair.” The calamity that befell us is born of the convulsions of greed—the anger of men who fear the progress of mankind. But human hatred is passing, dictators will perish, and the power they took from the people will return to the people. And as long as men die for it, freedom will not perish.
Soldiers! Do not succumb to these creatures who despise you, make you slaves, control your life, tell you what to do, what to think and how to think! To those who torture you, put you on rations, treat you like cattle, and use you like cannon fodder! Do not succumb to these monsters, machine people, with a mechanical mind and a mechanical heart! You're not cars! You're not cattle! You people! There is love and humanity in your heart! Only those whom no one loves hate, only the unhuman and the unloved.
Soldiers! Do not fight for slavery, fight for freedom. St. Luke said, “In everyone’s soul is the Kingdom of God.” Not one! Not a single group, all people, all of you! Everyone has power! Power to make a discovery! Power to make others happy, to make life free and beautiful, to make life a wonderful adventure! In the name of democracy, use this power!
Unite and fight for a new world, a just one in which everyone has the opportunity to work. Where the young have a future and the old have stability! The scoundrels came to power promising all this, but they lied to us, they did not keep their promises! They never do it! Dictators enslave people, so let us fight to keep these promises! So that the world will be free, that there will be no national borders, there will be no greed, hatred and intolerance! Let us fight for a reasonable world in which science and progress will be the guarantee of universal happiness!
7 out of 10

This film is a very sharp political satire on the Nazi regime and a rather bold picture not only because of the fact that it violated the censorship of the time, but also because it was released in 1940. The acute situation that developed at that time in Europe forced, 15 years after the appearance of sound in the cinema, Chaplin, who resisted this for so long, to speak. C. Chaplin, describing real, historical events, gave comicality to the main villains of that time, two dictators A. Hitler and B. Mussolini. And although most jokes today do not seem funny, it should be noted that Chaplin’s style in the film is preserved.

The general mood of the film: From the film and blows the spirit of romanticism and hope for the best, which is a little tense, as more natural would look fear and despair so not characteristic of Chaplin. Knowing from newspapers and radio about the oppression of Jews, about the beginning of the world war, about calls to die for the country, about the lack of love in people, it becomes clear why Chaplin was introduced into the film lyrical moods. But today such sentiments look naive, and the general protractedness of A. Hinkel's comicality leads more to boredom than to laughter.
Hinkel and the Barber. In general, it is clear that it was necessary to ridicule Hitler in his crown moments: speeches, political ambition, excessive impulsivity. Hinkel appears as a real clown and is the exact opposite of Hitler. And although Chaplin left Hitler’s inherent cynicism in Hinkel, who looks at the death of his testers without any regret, I found no more serious parallel between them. Yes, costumes, hairstyle and mustache were, but this is just tinsel, like a bright package, but the gift inside turned out to be very one-sided. I liked the barber better. Chaplin kept the sweet image of a tramp in the barber and gave him courage in the fight for his values, for his freedom. The barber is the voice of justice and righteous anger, which, as Chaplin predicted, will soon descend upon dictators with cold hearts.

That's what it's worth watching. It is pronounced by those with whom the Allies were fighting (German troops). For this speech Chaplin was criticized, but no matter what, she helped to rally people both in the United States, which is evidenced by great commercial success, and in Europe. Chaplin so sharply tears off the mask of the comedian that before us appears not the nameless barber, and the creator of the film. His speech remains relevant to this day and is a voice of humanity amidst a now-thriving cynicism.

Instead of a conclusion. Although the jokes are rather protracted, Hitler is not a complete clown, or a cat, and excessive lyricism speaks of the naivety of the film. But with all this Chaplin’s comic style remains here, and the final speech is very touching to be pronounced without falsehood and with all my heart. This is a film for those who are tired of cynical films about the war, those who are tired of special effects and want to watch a good movie resembling a performance in a circus. For while the soldiers used weapons in the war for peace, Chaplin used his main weapon (humor) in the struggle for the souls of men.

8 out of 10

Creating a super action movie is not difficult, minimum acting, maximum special effects. But the right thing to do in one movie is to mix laughter and tears... only Chaplin can. The Great Dictator is the story of time, people, and the world. After all, everyone knows the name of this dictator and all the terrible things that are associated with him. Chaplin shows it from the other side, the side of humor. After all, it is ridiculous to see A. Hitler lying on the table subjugates the entire “globular”, as toly growls, toly grunts at the sight of a beautiful girl, as he tries to make himself taller and more majestic with the help of a chair and pillows.
I really liked the girl who played Jewish. Paulette Goddard, Chaplin's third wife. Beautiful, brave and emotional.

At the end of the film, the speech of the whole people is transmitted through one barber. Hatred of Nazis and dictators who take advantage of people’s souls inspires them to make the “right choice” and use bodies as weapons of war. Fear that the world will remain the same. Just as cruel. But the human soul is given wings and they can rise above the dirt, and having ceased to commit senseless murders, coups, try to preserve peace. The world is peaceful and winged.

They were both born in April 1889. They were about the same height, in childhood suffered deprivation. Eventually, both became world famous. One man amused and appeased millions of people, the other burned millions in ovens. Sooner or later Chaplin had to make fun of Hitler. And the decision to shoot the parody came to the great comedian at a time when the insidious Austrian was not perceived as a threat. His crimes were ignored. Everyone except Chaplin.

It took two years to create the Great Dictator and $2 million out of Chaplin’s pocket. It's hard to imagine how much nerve he spent on this movie. All these two years, threats, letters, pressure from above, and a call for United Artists to abandon the project were poured on the director. However, against all odds, the premiere of “The Great Dictator” took place on October 15, 1940, when Europe was already embroiled in World War II, when France had already surrendered, and Britain was fighting back from Luftwaffe air raids.
This is Chaplin's first dialogue film (" City Lights" and "New Times" still contained a soundtrack of music and effects. And this is his first major painting that lacks the famous Little Tramp. However, in The Dictator, Chaplin plays two roles at once: a Jewish hairdresser and the ruler of the country of Tomenia (a parody of Germany) Adenoid Hinkel (a parody of yourself-know-who). It is worth mentioning that, despite the external and internal similarity of the Barber and the Tramp, they are two different characters. They have different life history and different countries, and the Tramp was always a vagabond, and the Barber has his own thing, and the business is a barber. The barber himself is a kind person, in many ways brave, honest, but rather absent-minded.
Adenoid Hinkel is an absolutely great character. Dictator, crook and hanger. He alone governs the country, only resorting to the advice of his friends - stupid Hering and arrogant Garbich. His speeches are impulsive, his threats insidious, his promises empty. This dictator did nothing good for Tomania. The only thing he succeeds in is to oppress the Jews and shoot the discontented. Hinkel, having liberated himself, enslaved his people, and his dirty hands reach farther, to the whole world. And if he gets it, he'll destroy it (see the Globe Dance scene). Overall, this is a very caustic parody of Adolf Hitler. Chaplin exposes him and openly laughs at him. And this was at that time (the end of the thirties), when the ruler of Germany some almost considered a savior from the evil Russian Communists! We can only envy the courage and courage of Charles Chaplin.
We have made several arrests.
- A few? How much is that?
- Nothing astronomical. Five or ten thousand.
- Oh! - On a day.

The great comedian from the very beginning declared that fascism (and Nazism) were the lot of bloody criminals, that it costs them nothing to kill and send thousands of people to camps every day.
We have just discovered the most wonderful, wonderful poisonous gas! He will kill everyone!

Later in his autobiography, Chaplin wrote that he could not laugh at the Nazis if he knew what was happening in the concentration camps. But he seemed to suspect what was going on. A parody of Germany was necessary. I had to say that I don’t believe, fear or wag my tail before Hitler and Co. More broadly, the “Great Dictator” is a mockery not only of Hitler but of all dictators. It is not surprising that Stalin gave a low artistic assessment of the picture.
Ironically, Chaplin was accused of being a communist in a flourishing democracy. Threats to boycott the film in theaters. The cries of accusations subsided only when the United States entered the war. Truly a vile and two-faced attitude towards one of the most honest people in cinema.
The Great Dictator is one of the most daring films of its time, if not the most daring. In addition to its satirical roll, the picture contains many amazing artistic finds, funny scenes and tragic, even silent cinema techniques. For such a film, Charles Chaplin should have erected a monument during his lifetime. Instead, he was persecuted as a medieval witch. Maybe I will be objected to and found the films of the 1940s and better and more soulful, but for me, The Great Dictator will always be a model of courage and honesty. Those qualities that were so lacking in the 1930s, the absence of which led to the most terrible war in history.

Everyone has the right to be free. It would seem that a simple thought – and humanity finds so many contradictions in it that it distorts it and changes it in its own way, often despotic and cruel. A striking example is the idea of Adolf Hitler, the idea of the superiority of one race over others and their extermination. In a word, the policy of genocide, and the destruction of not one Jewish nation persecuted for many centuries, but all in a row. The film “The Great Dictator” makes it very clear to the viewer what human cruelty and complete apathy for others are. This picture calls for goodness and peace in the world, because hatred cannot last forever and is the only quality of man. In other words, this picture is an awakening calling for action in the name of human freedom. The great genius of cinema, Charles Spencer Chaplin, could not remain indifferent to the tyranny of the dictators of those times and their policies against human freedom. That is why he created this truly bright film so that the viewer, mired in the darkened ideology of statesmen, could breathe fully and leave the cinema with the conviction of his unshakable faith in good and, most importantly, in himself.
Maestro Chaplin, as always, remained a versatile and self-devoted professional, judge for himself he performed in many hypostases: director, screenwriter, actor (and it should be noted two roles, completely different people), composer, and eventually producer (spent a little much about two million dollars). It should also be noted that Chaplin had a great advantage over other filmmakers - he was a person financially independent, which, of course, is a huge incentive for the creative process.

In the film, there are many allegorical moments that make you think, for example, remember the shot when a cage with a bird inside was shown and at the same time the barber was hiding from the military. In my opinion, Chaplin definitely wanted to say how oppressive the system of totalitarianism acts on a person.
What the director portrayed in the person of Adenoid Hinkel the leader of the Third Reich, I think it is not necessary to say, because it immediately catches the eye of the appearance of the dictator from Tomenia.
Whatever the political background of this film, it is worth paying tribute to Charles Chaplin that he wanted to awaken people from their apathy and call for action in the name of freedom, it is not about democracy, it is about man in general, his principles and rights. He should live, not serve—this is, in my opinion, the position of a great master who, with his final speech, inspired many people, and I believe will inspire future generations.

10 out of 10

You always expect too much from Charlie Chaplin’s paintings. So much that there is a chance that in the end such a load a person may not master. And if he does, he may not understand ... well, and further along the familiar scheme. The Great Dictator - perhaps the most daring statement on the topic of fascism and people who supported the chosen direction. Courage lies in the competent ability to ridicule the situation, while trying not to hurt anyone (or almost anyone). Which is very unusual in modern cinema.

At first, the picture is not catchy at all. Chaplin remains himself and forces the viewer to observe the already exhausted situations in which he previously revealed his talent. Against the backdrop of the ongoing war, this causes some confusion. But then, the storytelling style changes the path, gains momentum and begins to work as it should have from the beginning.
In parallel, telling two different stories, the author does not forget about the main thing - to laugh. Humor culminates with the appearance of a character in the plot that looks like Mussolini, after which each scene of the confrontation between the two leaders of the fascist trend is on the verge of madness and genius. And this is perhaps the most interesting thing about this picture (except for the final speech and the overall scale of what is happening). We cannot say that there is nothing else to watch here, just against the background of such an action the story of a Jewish barber.
... looks a little faded. But, it is impossible not to admit how graceful, easy and beautiful in this cute show looked Paulette Goddard, who managed to visit Chaplin's wife in life.
All this, perhaps, does not give the viewer a clear understanding of whether to watch the picture, especially in such a distant film 2013. Definitely worth it! At least because no review can tell you how gorgeous this work is.

The director's verdict: "People come to their senses, what are you doing?"

What did Americans know in 1938-1940 about Hitler, the Third Reich, and the ghetto? But how deeply Charles Chaplin delved into the essence of the phenomenon of dictatorship, even if he had a remote idea of the particular person Hitler and the specific situation in Germany. How subtly he noticed the goals, the means of the dictator, and their absurdity. His dictator, he is both stupid and intelligent, and bright personality and grey mediocrity, and insensitive as a bird of prey (not typical of Chaplin), and sensitive as Nero, a man of mystery, a maniac. I don't know what he's thinking, but we know he wants something very, very bad, he's wreaking havoc. A lover of strawberries with cream, a lover of throwing the airy planet with his ass to the quiet music of the apocalypse, he is terrible the more caricatured, because he is written off from a real person.
Toy ghettos, toy stormtroopers, toy dictators, they evoke deep sadness, and the linking of all this is a small swarming barber, defenseless but still alive, causes sorrow even greater. What awaits him in this toy world? Each new word of the little tramp in the epilogue of a toy movie corresponds to the greater evil that is happening in the real world after these events. World War II was just beginning, and the worst was yet to come.
4 out of 10

Charlie Chaplin's film The Great Dictator was released in 1940. During World War II, the viewer was able to see not a funny parody of Hitler, but rather a sad story about the life of Jews in pre-war Germany.
So, in a certain country of Tomania after the First World War, an aggressive party headed by Hinkel comes to power. And the difference with its prototype is probably the name. And the rest is facial expressions, the manner of speaking painfully similar to the real Hitler.
At the same time, after twenty years of amnesia caused by the war, a Jewish hairdresser returns to his home, who does not suspect anything about the changes that have occurred in the country in connection with the coming of the new government. In his Jewish “ghetto”, the police create absolute lawlessness: they smash shops, beat residents, and people humbly tolerate what is happening. In his house, he meets a girl who bravely fights off attackers with a pan and dreams of fleeing to another country.
The film is not about the dictator himself, but rather about what happened when he came to power. And there were horrors that I didn't expect to see in comedy, but on the other hand, how could one make a pure comedy about the persecution of Jews? How could they be ridiculed? – in the film they were depicted by the most sincere and positive characters, who even in the most awkward situations were shown cute.
But at the same time, the film left an imprint of Chaplin. He mocked Hinkel from the heart: this hero falls, microphones bend with his speeches, and he seduces girls with a funny growl. Here and one of the most famous scenes, namely, his play with a ball in the shape of the earth, which he flirtatiously throws and charmingly catches.
Chaplin never hid the fact that he was an opponent of Hitler, despite the fact that the image of the tramp was similar to the appearance of Hitler, and their difference in their birthdays was only four days. The persecution of Jews was disgusting to him, something he could not ignore and this was one of the reasons that the film was released.
The last scene, where the hero gives a speech addressed to all the residents of Tomania and soldiers, is the voice of Chaplin, horrified by what was happening in the world during the filming of the film. I want to end with a quote.

We've picked up speed, but we've closed ourselves: with machines that bring wealth, we still need them. Our knowledge has made us cynical, and our minds have become hard and unkind. We think too much and feel too little: more than machines, we need humanity, more than intelligence, we need kindness. Without these qualities, life will be violent and all will be lost.

7 out of 10