Film - "The Kid"

The Kid (1921) The Kid. Dir., Writ., Prod., Charles Chaplin. Perf. Charles Chaplin, Edna Purviance, Carl Miller, Jackie Coogan, and Tom Wilson. First National, 1921. Synopsis: “A Picture with a smile – and perhaps a tear” The woman, Edna, is seen departing the hospital alone, as a parallel scene is shown of the man who knocks over a picture of her in to the fire, a clear demonstration of the failed relationship. As Edna passes a church engaged in a wedding ceremony, she decides to leave her child in a limousine parked in front, with a heart-filled note in the baby’s basket. Edna then persists in her desire to commit suicide. The limousine is then stolen by two thieves who throw the baby out and dump it in a waste can. Lighter music then settles the mood, as The Tramp approaches this horrific site. Charlie attempts to find a home for this child, as he thinks the mother must have misplaced him. But when he attempts to restore the kid back to his original place, an officer predicts he is the illegitimate parent. Chaplin is subsequently forced to take the baby home and make a nice dwelling place for him. Though he doesn’t have much money, he does aim all his efforts toward providing the best for this child, now his child. Five years later, the little boy resembles Charlie and the two seem to take equal care of each other. Edna becomes a star, yet in the back of her mind loans for her missing child. She works with poor children, in hope that some day, her baby will show up. Charlie and the kid also work hard together, as the youngster throws rocks at windows and Chaplin innocently passes through the neighborhood with glass on his back. If no job opportunities are available, then people must obviously make it for themselves. Later that day, the kid gets into a confrontation with a young bully and eventually leads to Charlie’s involvement with the bully’s big brother. The police do nothing to stop the fight, but Edna does and she quickly settles the quarrel. She then reports that the kid is severely ill and must see a doctor, as he is taken home. When the doctor arrives, he questions the kid’s relationship to Charlie and he is eventually taken to the Orphan Asylum by authorities who feel that the child needs proper care and attention. Charlie fights to keep the kid, but looses as he is thrown into the back of a truck and driven away. Charlie races, parallel to the truck, on rooftops and ultimately takes the kid back into his possession. The two then go to a flophouse where Charlie attempted to mask the kid under his sheets, yet doesn’t succeed. When the owner discovers an ad rewarding anyone who found the missing kid, he immediately waits until the two are asleep and steals the kid to obtain his reward. Charlie then awakens to find the boy missing and goes on a hunt for his young love. As all hope fails, he falls asleep on the curb and has a dream about angels parading the streets and then devils dooming the land. Charlie is soon awoken by a policeman and taken to Edna’s house where the kid and Charlie reunite and the door shuts. In this comedy is a simple human mistake or social question magnified, reducing the action to chaos and the social question to absurdity? If so, identify the mistake and/or social question involved. Does this ‘reduction to the absurd’ plot structure succeed in revealing the ridiculousness of social or human attitudes? Explain. Reductio ad absurdum is a common comic structure, of the eight listed by Gerald Mast, and it takes a human mistake or social issue, magnifies it, and reduces the action to absurdity. This structure cleverly reveals the ridiculousness of human attitudes in deeply engraved morals, which often times only apply to those people who conduct them. The main issue that Charlie explores in “The Kid” is the distinction between reality and the ideal world many attempt to follow or see as correct. Chaplin primarily focuses on society’s standard definitions of a ‘legitimate’ family; what comprises one and what appropriate actions correlate with it. As Charlie himself grew up in rough conditions, “The Kid” is a movie which parallels Charlie’s childhood and its inherent difficulties. The beginning of the film lays out his premise, which states that according to society, a proper family consists of a married couple and then children. Though as depicted, this is not always the case. Edna is shown leaving the hospital alone while her former husband is seen in a different scene, near a fire where Edna’s picture recently fell. Charlie does this intentionally to contrast social standards of idealism versus what some of us like to call life. Ironically, Edna passes a church where a wedding ceremony is taking place and deposits her child in the limo standing in front. This ceremony brings together a couple which is undergoing a highly respected procedure, yet when examined closely, quit the contrary is discovered. A beautiful young woman is marrying an old man, immediately turning this exterior presentable picture into one that’s not quit right, on a deeper level. Edna, on the other hand, feels so embarrassed of her decision to have a child with no ring on her finger that she considers suicide. Because society views material things with high esteem, Edna places her baby boy in a fancy limo, so as to provide it with a ‘good’ place to live, at least according to society’s definitions. Irony kicks in when this fancy car is then stolen and the baby is thrown to the trash. This quickly diminishes the child’s worth and further decreases the baby’s chance to a bright future. Shortly after this incident, The Tramp, another figure society regards with grave disrespect and illegitimacy, strolls around to find this child in the garbage. As Charlie is a man who finds great comfort and use for the garbage zone, such as scavenging for cigarette butts, he encounters someone who he directly sympathizes with. Again, in society’s eyes Charlie would make close to the worst father, due to his ill status and poor reputation. Well Chaplin, as a man who came from such a desperate background and rose to the top, decides to reduce all these definitions of good and moral to sheer absurdity. When the Tramp takes the child home to care for it, the kid is placed into the arms of a compassionate father figure who may not live according to ‘legitimate’ standards, but does provide a better place than any limo would. The scene here shows that despite all the moral codes established by our community, there are exceptions and various way of life which still should be classified and respected. Not everyone can afford a mansion and limo to ride around on, yet love and care are far better qualities that actually add to a child’s future, whereas money may sometimes degrade it. Several years later, Charlie and the kid live happily together, caring for each other with equal amounts of love and responsibility, regardless of social norms. The Tramp cares for the child with all his heart, providing all the essentials of life, eating, hygiene, and work. Work, another factor ridiculed by Chaplin, is presented in a funny, yet intriguingly cleaver method way of making a living. Jackie runs through the neighborhood breaking windows, while Charlie innocently walks by with spare glass pieces, in case fixing were in need. This reduces our economy and the “American Dream” to the absurd by depicting how destruction brings business. The buy out of small businesses and the devastation of families by larger ones is what makes our American ideal prosper. This ideal, again being criticized, is finally marked when the kid gets into a fight with a bully. Charlie quickly steps in for his defense, though he is capable of fighting the bully off himself. This scene verified the definition of true love and partnership, between father and son, not that of greed and competition. Though this relationship was not set, by any means, according to society’s morals, its strengths bind it together tighter than many families only dream about, those who were constructed in a ‘legitimate’ manner. Later in the film, Charlie undergoes a tight sleep in which a very interesting dream sequence takes place. The same streets and environment turn into an illusion of heaven, everything is clean and white and all the main participants in Charlie’s life, including himself, are dressed as angels and can fly. This heaven on earth is interpreted as reality in Charlie’s dream, similar to his depiction in “Sunnyside”, though a clear absurdity is made so that the audience understands it is, in fact, a dream. Later, as every rose has a thorn, little devils fill the screen, as they made their way into this heaven through sly means. These devils are, of course, the symbols of human sin on earth and the corruption they bring. This sin is also classified by society and as these devils act in abrupt fashions, swarming around the town seeking mischief. Society’s labels alter similarly in such disorderly and incongruent ways, seeking favored groups as well as scapegoat ones. In other words, these choices of good and bad, right and wrong, legitimate and illegitimate are formed by society and at any second little devils may sneak through the gates and change all established meanings, again referring to the absurdity of social order and definitions. Additionally, this dream identifies with all human beings in that, no one is perfect. Some men or women may come close, but there is a little devil in all of us which ultimately make reality the way it is and not a utopian place we all aim to establish. This is demonstrated by Charlie’s fight and his ultimate destruction, by the cop. As with the fight earlier, in reality with the bully’s brother, if either player ceased and turned the other way, the battle would terminate, but there is always this driving force that makes people who they are and life the way it is. All this goes back to our central theme of reality versus the ideal world. In an ideal place, people would all get along and if any confrontation took place it would be settled through peaceful means. But just as society sets certain moral principles, these ideal standards are meant to be broken, for reality would not be the same without them. Again as in “Sunnyside”, Charlie is woken up from dreamland and taken back to reality by a cop. This cop, unlike in his other films, actually delivers Charlie to happiness when he is dropped off at Edna’s place, with Jackie. The ending is left ambiguous because as this film clearly parallels Charlie’s personal life, there was no way Charlie could have finished the movie unhappily. So instead, he leaves it for viewer interpretation and does conclude, on a positive note, that the people who questioned his ability as a father finally saw past his status and came to terms with his love toward the kid. Based on the film you are analyzing, other films you have read in your text, and what we have been discussing in class, does this comic filmmaker qualify as a comic “auteur”? What makes a director an “auteur”? Are these consistent themes, attitudes, and characters that remain consistent from comedy to comedy? If so, what are they? Explain fully, citing examples wherever possible. Charles Chaplin is definitely a comic auteur. In French the word means: an author, an original developer and if anyone fits that definition, it’s the Tamp. To start with his simple, yet profoundly intricate name: The Tramp. In all of Chaplin’s movies, as he grew up in moderate poverty, his character mirrors an outsider of social comforts. In any Chaplin film, “The Kid”, “City Lights”, and “Sunnyside” Chaplin places himself in the low and degraded position up against society, who he consistently struggles to fight. “The Kid” in particular depicts Jackie as Charlie when he was a kid, showing the struggles and sheer repulsion he experienced from the world around him. Though this Tramp was not fully developed until Chaplin reached Mutual, his image with the mustache, shaggy clothes, funny walk, black hat, and amazing stunt capability was already well known. Though Chaplin started with Mack Sennett, who continuously gave him a string of gags to perform, he personally structured these gags to make richer scenes with more detail, character conflict, and social implications, using these gags to define the characters. Unlike the “L’Arroseur Arrusee” which many Sennett films were based, involving an object or scene and revolving a serious of gags around it, Chaplin cleverly used timeless material to integrate character traits with argument and social injustices. It was more into his Essanay period, and later at Mutual, that Charlie began to develop consistent themes dealing with class differences, “The Tramp” and “Work”, women and love, “A Women” and “The New Janitor”, a burlesque on social institutions, “Police”, and finally his famous object transformation. “The Kid”, a picture from the First Nationals, demonstrates this use through the kettle he attached to a string for Jackie’s bottle, the blanket with a whole; he wore as a poncho, and the hole he made in a chair for convenient bathroom utility. These themes persists through almost every Chaplin film, especially that of transformation, seen in “One A.M” and “Pawnshop”, where simple household appliances or disserted objects come to life in the hands of this master, an essential element in silent films. It is very rare that Chaplin’s name is used in comparison to a style he did not invent. Many critics place Chaplin on a pedestal and use his style and techniques as a frame of reference to those after him. Additionally, women were huge in Chaplin films. Edna Purviance has played the majority of female role in Tramp features and her presence, along with that of other women, serves as a metaphor for the natural beauty uncorrupted and untouched by society. He was always portrayed walking the path alone, predominantly in the end of his films, as the Tramp never succeeds nor does he acquire the women he desires. In “City Lights”, Charlie attempted so many jobs and everything in his power to give Edna the privilege of sight, as eventually it was obtained from the rich drunk, but because of the Tramp’s destiny to failure, Charlie was imprisoned for money he didn’t steel. The police are, as usual, included to portray the absurdity of social institutions and their failure to fulfill their appropriate functions, providing good. In “The Kid”, though Charlie is eventually delivered by the police to happiness, the initial battle between Charlie and the bully was stopped by the woman, while the policeman was thrown aside, like the useless authority he was. And in a later scene, it is the police who come to cease the kid from Chaplin, a perfect father, who they regard as illegitimate strictly based on appearance. The police once again are doing what’s legitimate versus what is right, they are protecting social definitions over peoples’ personal circumstances. As for cinematic techniques, Chaplin was not a fan of the extreme. He focused on the substance of the film, its inherent morals and implications, not with the film itself. He made consciousness of the cinematic medium disappear, an advanced art which many criticized due to his black-screen endings of scenes, but really they served as closure and were far from intrusive. Chaplin was a fan of medium and far shorts as he dealt with subjects and themes we deal with on a daily basis, we don’t see the world in close-up, we view it through far or medium shorts, as Charlie portrayed his films. In most of Chaplin’s movies the camera does little movement or zooming so as to make the experience mirror reality. For example, in “City Lights” the audience was never aware of the cameras existence or was it apparent in “The Kid”. Chaplin also had a strong repulsion to editing; he hated resorting to it and shot the scene 100 times before he chose one of the takes fit the best. Chaplin had tremendous range with paradoxical combinations of human sentiments and reactions. In “The Kid,” which was one of Chaplin’s more sentimental pictures, he dealt with issues that were close to heart and that paralleled his personal life, exerting a wide array of emotions from the audience. This movie drew a thin line between laughter and tragedy. It related the two extremes, allowing both emotions to escape; serving as a visible contradiction for the audience, who later were able to feel and see the values and morals underlying the film. This quality made Chaplin’s genius stand out. He was able to stir so much laughter or sorrow in one film that through those extremes people were able to draw conclusions about what Chaplin felt was wrong with society. His issues dealing with alcohol, suicide, social institutions, family, and women were all so well developed and thought out that their relevance still holds true today. These silent pictures are not only classics due to their age, but their value lies deep within their themes and criticism. If people outside the film-making business were to view these movies, many positive changes, that have been requested and burlesqued for so many years, will begin to rise. In sum, this makes Chaplin a genius, a legend, and a unique example for many intellects to follow. In other words, a perfect auteur for today’s great brains, like Woody Allen and various others, to study and follow. Which social class or classes of humanity does this comedy portray? What is the attitude on the part of the filmmaker to this class of humanity? Which social class of humanity do you think this comedy appeals to most? Why? Explain, providing examples from the film to support your essay points. The beginning of the film illustrates the distinction between desirable social class and illegitimate class through Edna, her baby and the church she passes on the way from the hospital. She attempts to give her child away to a better place by depositing him in a limo, society’s symbol of wealth and class. Because she is a single mother, she feels unfit to care for a child alone, as the culture would clearly mark this a deviant choice. Ironically, the limo is stolen by two men of lower class, thieves, and the baby is thrown into the garbage, a peasantry level location. Yet, this degraded area turns out to be one of hope for the baby. The Tramp, a character of lower class presented by his torn clothes and inability to afford cigarettes, takes this disserted child home to safety. Five years later, though Charlie and the kid are very happy with each other, it is higher class society that continues to degrade and devalue their relationship. When Jackie gets sick and is visited by the doctor, their direct affiliation is questioned and then declared illegitimate. The doctor assigns authorities to take the kid to an Orphan Asylum, a parallel from Chaplin’s life, where they feel we will be better taken care of and provided for. They cannot see past social standards of how a ‘good’ family is supposed to be structured, therefore; they attempt to alter a perfectly arranged partnership. The police here, once again, serve as robots to follow commands and not provide for the good of the people they are sworn to protect. Jackie is then placed in the back of this truck which resembles those used to transport cattle, making the kid of an even lower class. In addition to the already evil action they induced, taking a child away from his father and a loving home, they place him in a cage to be escorted to another prison. Charlie, of course, doesn’t give up the fight and ultimately catches the truck, taking the kid and running off to a flophouse. The mere fact that they end up in this cheap place, further demonstrates their low status, as the upper class would either run to a hotel or one of their other secret locations. In this flophouse, Chaplin attempts to sneak the kid in so as not to pay for him, depicting their poverty, but when the owner finds him under the covers, he requests that extra dime for Jackie’s stay. The proprietor is obviously in need of money because when he sees the ad in search of Jackie, posted by Edna who realized she wants her son back, he immediately turns him in. Here, Chaplin is demonstrating the level of poverty by having the manager choose money over any kind of human decency or understanding, he sees Jackie as merely a source of income. Ironically, a sign is posted behind the manager stating: ‘Not responsible for valuables stolen.’ This allows the audience to interpret that maybe Jackie is not the only possession the owner steals from his clients while they are sleeping. On the other hand, this flophouse is a cheap place to stay and obviously directed at the lower class population, so what valuables other than people, like Jackie, could possibly be stolen? Charlie has always written films that appeal to everyone. Though his role, and Jackie’s in “The Kid”, is of the lower class, there are references to upper class individuals which aim to criticize. Because of a concept known as upper class snobbery, the rich who enjoyed these films simply viewed them for surface laughs, while those who were not so privileged looked for deeper implications. Charlie grew up in poverty and therefore presented his movies through such a lens. He consistently portrayed the main character, the Tramp, in the lower division of society, reminding the world that you can rise above. He severely reviled the upper class due to their obliviousness to situations around them, money having filled their wallets, but not their heads. All of Chaplin’s films inquire the subject of class and burlesque the myth of upper class superiority. As a personal advocate of lower class brilliance, and the later advance to upper rank, Charlie never left being the Tramp and therefore, was highly respected by everyone. This respect allowed him to raise questions pertaining to the current society and made his movies exceedingly insightful, time-less, and accordingly legendary.