A Woman of Paris

An innovative and complex film that is only recently receiving recognition. Unfortunately, many of the subtleties and wise human/social commentary/insight were lost on me and the film was therefore not very affecting. The artistic camera work was appreciated, though.

I knew nothing at all about this film going into it, so I was surprised to learn that Chaplin isn't in it. Which was fine with me. It's a run-of-the-mill melodrama contrasting the petty lives of the idle rich with the hardships of the working class, done with some degree of elegance but nothing spectacular. A little too blatantly moralistic for my tastes.

Chaplin making something like this is shocking

The tragedy here is brutal, but Chaplin provides a careful look at these characters, with Marie (Edna P) at the center of it all. This focus allows the complexity of Marie's difficult situation to come to the fore, and means our sympathies are with her even as she makes mistakes or retreats at inopportune moments. I appreciated the coda both for its one great joke (mother, it's father!) as well as for the wonderful last shot, mimicking a pathos in other traveling shots (Modern Times, Cabiria).

Casamento ou Luxo tinha sua première há 100 anos em Los Angeles. Acho que quando o Chaplin resolveu filmar um drama realista para os padrões da época, o fez com exímio know-how aqui. Veja bem, os dramas da época eram infestados de maniqueísmos narrativo e sobreatuação dos atores, Chaplin aqui dirige os atores como as pessoas agem na vida real, com atitudes e complexidades reais. Na época ninguém ligou, mas o colocando em perspectiva histórica foi um puta avanço narrativo para 1923. Coleção Folh

Interesting because it's a Chaplin directed film that is 1.) A straight drama and 2.) Doesn't have Chaplin in it. That said, I found it overly contrived and a bit too melodramatic. It moves along nicely and is structured well--it's a competent piece, but it doesn't work nearly as well as most of his comedies.

Chaplin attempt to change it up and try his hands on a serious drama without starring in it himself is not completely unsuccessful; it is nicely understated, the acting is on par especially by Adolphe Menjou as Pierre Revel and Chaplin's directing is assured as ever, but the plot and morals are too conventional to make a lasting impressing.

Auteurists claim that A.W.O.P bombed because it was a Chaplin film without Chaplin that wasn't a comedy, so audiences stayed away and most critics failed to put aside their narrow preconceptions. It's a great story, and it sounds plausible on paper, but there is one small problem: it isn't true. What Chaplin delivered was a fairly mediocre melodrama about a boring woman's uninteresting love life. It's technically well made, but Chaplin couldn't overcome the weakness of his writing.

81.50

It's got some affecting moments that ring true to Chaplin's melancholic worldview, but the film surrounding those scenes is pretty dang dry.

"Do you think it would've been interesting if Chaplin had played this part himself?" http://illusionpodcast.blogspot.com/2015_09_01_archive.html

Definitely shows Chaplin's versatility as a director/producer; as a writer, not so much.

A nice drama; nothing amazing but I think it's a bit better than people are giving it credit for. Adolphe Menjou as Pierre Revel is a delightfully smarmy character and his performance makes up for Chaplin's absence on-screen.

80.500

The plots problems are apparent and hard to overlook. The movie is still good however, and Chaplin has some very nice directoral touches for the time.

Kinda weird Chaplin making drama, and without him in it. It's pretty similar to other dramas of the day, and it's rather moralistic. You can tell it was made by someone with brilliant directorial senses, but it's just not such a great movie.

My past mind-set was "If Charlie Chaplin makes something that's not funny, then I'm not watching it". Thinking back at it, I'll be a bit more lenient, but I won't feel comfortable watching it again.

#764

The social problems of this movie are lost on the modern day viewer. The quality of this simply isn't that good, and it was--there are no two ways about it--boring. Chaplin should have stuck with comedy for the silent era, luckily he learned his lesson after this movie.

A special film in Chaplin's filmography: possibly his most dramatic one (the comic reliefs are few and far between) and with no role for the man himself (his leading lady at the time, Edna Purviance, stars as the woman of the title). The complex characterization (no black-or-white) makes this a realistic testament to the inner battles of a young lady who keeps being let down by the people around her and by herself. The eventual march to awareness is unadorned enough to consider this a winner.

718

This formula (also applied to contemporary films) never works in the film's advantage. Jean clearly says: "There has been a terrible accident, we must postpone our wedding" ...days, not years !!! There wouldn't have been a film obviously, had Marie not been such a stuck up, stingy bitch (which makes you question her love for Jean), no matter how unfortunate her life in the village may be. The music resembles "The Kid", just tweaked in areas, though the performances and camera work are admirable.

s'alright

792

# 876

A touching movie with good performances that carry you through the sometimes underdeveloped plot.