Reviews on movie A Woman of Paris: A Drama of Fate (3)

Drama. One of the two works of the great Charlie Chaplin, where he does not play the main role (the second will be ' Countess from Hong Kong'); nevertheless, this does not change the fact that this is another masterpiece of the great director. His absence prompted me to look at the work. Honestly, after the first view, there was a strange aftertaste. It seems like a class, but it seems not, like, like, but not. I've now reconsidered it, and I've realized that my first opinion was wrong. And this picture can be considered a masterpiece. And here is my brief opinion - mores 'highest light'. And according to tradition, I do not intend to talk about the disadvantages of this masterpiece, because there are simply no such, I will dwell on the advantages for which you should spend your time on this work.
So here they are:

1. History - in this picture there is no Chaplin, which means there is no Tramp, so the heroes were two people in love with each other, whom life separated for several years, after which a chance meeting led to a whole series of events that led to not the happiest ending. At one time, for such a daring attempt Chaplin to move away from the image of the Tramp and tell a simple human story, so that the audience did not rely on his hero - did not receive due recognition. Only time put everything in its place, which is good. But if you think about the story of Marie and Jean, it is all around us, and we do not notice it (which is strange). After all, life sometimes throws out such trouts that no writer can invent. I really liked it, although I admit that it can be digested only under the appropriate mood.

2. Drama - here there are hints of comedy, although the main genre is drama, or as Chaplin himself called it ' drama of fate', which even more accurately characterizes it. There are only a few dramatic moments in the film, but what! They strongly influence the perception of the viewer and his emotions. In these moments, it is simply impossible to feel like an outside observer, because they really cling to life. And this is, in fact, the only Chaplin picture with such a strong drama at the center of the story. You should appreciate it!

3. The music is just amazing. It is very clearly distributed for each specific scene, even a specific frame, in order to enhance its effect on the viewer. In the picture, two main motifs are heavy and pressing music of ordinary people and light melodies 'high light ' they form a contrast. The first motive is close to most of us; a sense of hopelessness, uncertainty about the future, sometimes despair. And on the other hand - ' the highest light ' but about it in the next paragraph.
4. Morals 'the highest light' - here this theme is presented in all its glory. Young ladies flirting with rich suitors, men containing these ladies (and sometimes vice versa), hypocrisy, envy, lust, endless parties, drunkenness, ' life one day' Maybe the genius presented them a little grotesque, but it's even better, let them look from the outside. It was then, it is now, and unfortunately it will continue. Ages come and go, costumes and outfits change, human behavior never!
A bit about the main characters:

1. Marie St. Clair, performed by Enda Purviance, is an ordinary village girl who dreams of marrying her lover, but a dramatic coincidence leads her to ' the highest light' Paris, where she becomes the content of a rich man. The shadow of the past does not let go and feelings flash again. The classic image of a girl rushing between happiness and luxury. Excellent role of Enda, she was very suitable for this image!
2. Pierre Revel, played by Adolf Menjou, is Marie’s keeper and rich man, leading an idle lifestyle. Although he sometimes behaves very noblely, withstanding Marie's tantrums, but this does not whitewash the image of a typical representative of the High Light & #39; A great role of Adolf, he played sincerely and very convincingly.
3. Jean Millet, played by Carl Miller, is Marie’s beloved, to whom a cruel fate has prepared a series of cruel trials. A humble, unhappy, devoted person who evokes the most pity and compassion. Carl was in this role just amazing! The most tragic hero, perhaps some echo of the Tramp, although who knows?
As a result, we have a masterpiece drama about the cruel fate of lovers, morals ' the highest world', all this under brilliant and soul-grabbing music, with magnificent actors, in which there is no Chaplin hero, but his invisible hand is felt.
9 out of 10

During his career, Chaplin did not shoot so many dramas, or rather melodramas, to be exact: these are “Monsieur Verdoux”, “Ramp Lights” and his first picture “Parisian”. In these tapes, the pressure of the comic element is minimal, almost negated to solve the problems of almost tragic drama. “Parisian” among them is the weakest tape, both in the narrative, as if under a piggyback transferred from Dreiser’s novel “Sister Carrie”, and in the acting performance, sagging under the weight of silent movie templates, and in the direction. Even the music written by Chaplin is somehow unbearably pompous and monotonous.
The absence of Chaplin himself as a performer capable of dramatic roles, as Monsieur Verdoux shows, greatly damaged the Parisian in terms of the convincingness of the conflicts portrayed. By all parameters of silent cinema of those years, "Parisian Woman" is a very average film, exaggerating emotionality beyond good taste, however, this was characteristic even of Murnau's masterpieces "Sunrise" and "The Last Man." Only Pabst, with the participation of the phenomenal Louise Brooks, managed to turn a silent melodrama into a sexualized archetype that has no analogues in the history of cinema.
Depicting the luxurious life of Parisian restaurants and parties, Chaplin follows the path of least resistance: his moralism is inflated and at the same time correct, because he does not hurt American conceit. Moving the action to a “depraved” France, Chaplin plays into the hands of Puritan sentiments in the early twentieth century US, which tend to believe that debauchery comes from Europe, and America is pure and innocent. At one time, Fitzgerald shattered this supposed complacency very much, showing that the American rich live no more righteous than European ones. The influence of Fitzgerald’s first two novels (The Beautiful and the Damned and On This Side of Paradise) on the artistic decision of The Parisian is as certain as the spirit of the Dreiser book, but Chaplin carefully tries to hide it, so as not to be a shaker of the basics.
“Sister Carrie” is a powerful anti-bourgeois novel, showing the destruction of human feelings in the world of profit and careerism, it is very gloomy and uncompromising for its time. “Parisian” this approach is clearly lacking: Chaplin is afraid of censorship, criticism in his address, so limited that morally scolds the characters, believing that they can change. If you criticize, hit hard, don’t be afraid, as the master did in “New Times, for example, but shooting the first feature-length picture, Chaplin was still timid and too circumspect for the picture to succeed.”
I used to watch The Parisian when I was in high school, and then the abstract moralism of the film seemed convincing and the conflicts expressive, well, then I still saw very little. Watching it now, I caught myself thinking that the tape was not just outdated, but for its half-heartedness, the director should have been ashamed - yet it was filmed by a genius, not an artisan. Melodrama is a genre that ruined silent cinema, bound it with chains of templates and unbearable Puritan sweetness, making it so monotonous and primitive that Dreyer’s lofty tragedies or Lang’s expressionist nightmares looked an anachronistic exception to the rule against the background of these cardboard melodramas.
Of course, Chaplin himself made many virtuoso and truly great comedies, but in the genre of drama, he never left the trace that he could leave if he were as maximalist as in comedies. However, “Monsieur Verdu” and “Ramp Fires” force even the most ardent opponent of Chaplin’s melodramas to correct their opinion.

This picture, shot in 1923, was the first of two films in which Charlie did not appear at all. Critics liked this picture very much, but the stupid public did not accept it. This film is almost the prototype of many melodramas “about the life of the upper world”. Of course, the film is mostly for women, men probably won’t like it. The story of a girl from a French province who leaves for Paris, disappointed in her family and loved one. A year later, we see her being kept by a rich man in Paris. The film is not funny at all, rather, life, despite the fact that it tells about a distant class for me.
One of the title quotes of the film is the phrase "Decide what you want - luxury and wealth or love and respect" (my free translation from English).
The end of the movie is very unusual. I advise you to look – really, a find.