
by Sam Juliano
Swing Little Girl, Swing high to the sky,
And don’t ever look at the ground,
If you’re looking at rainbows, look up to the sky,
You’ll never find rainbows, if you’re looking down,
Life may be dreary, but never the same,
Some days it’s sunshine, some days it’s rain.
Swing little girl, Swing high to the sky,
And don’t ever look to the ground,
If you’re looking at rainbows, look up to the sky,
But never, no never, look down.
-Charles Chaplin, 1969
When the immortality of Charles Chaplin is broached, one will readily identify the uproarious ingenuity of the conveyor belt and winding gear sequences in Modern Times, the eating of the shoe and the dinner roll dance in The Gold Rush, or the continuing drunk vs. sober saga of the millionaire played by Harry Myers in City Lights. Likewise, cineastes will no doubt recollect Monsieur Verdoux’s continued failed attempts at murdering Arabella, the hysterical vocals inflections in The Great Dictator or the spirited slapstick in Shoulder Arms when the doughboy goes undercover dressed as a tree. All of these films have multiple moments of comic inspiration, and still others like One A.M., A Dog’s Life and The Kid would serve as springboard for further discussion. Since it first appeared in 1928 The Circus has steadfastly held down the dubious position as Chaplin’s most underrated film, and the one that has received short shrift in both summary assessment and in the unavoidable rankings of the master’s canon. Yet The Circus has been favorably re-evaluated in recent years, and is now being seen by many as one of the silent clown’s supreme masterpieces, a film that boasts the strongest first reel of any of his films, and one that includes some of the best set pieces.
The film’s initial failure to click with the public had much to do with Chaplin’s own indifference. The star never mentioned the film in his autobiography, purportedly as a result of the ill-timing of its conception, execution and release, all of which transpired at a time the artist was winding down his marriage with Lita Grey. At the height of the legal battle, production of The Circus was brought to a total halt for eight months, when the lawyers sought to seize the studio assets. Chaplin was forced to smuggle such of the film as was already shot to safe hiding. Too much had been expected by the public after the previous phenomenon known as The Gold Rush, and Chaplin was so drained that he postponed production to spend some time in Europe. As if his domestic troubles were not enough, the film seemed fated to catastrophe of every kind. Even before shooting began, the huge circus tent which provides the principal setting for the film was destroyed by gales. After four weeks of filming, Chaplin discovered that bad laboratory work had made everything already shot unusable. In the ninth month of shooting, a fire raged through the studio, destroying sets and props. After the well-publicized reports of Chaplin’s endless takes of the set piece that actually prompted the film’s conception -the tightrope walker whose agility is challenged by a pack of monkeys- the star was anxious to wrap up production and put all the troubles and bad vibes that surrounded the production both personally and professionally and move on to the project that would eventually be seen by many as his greatest triumph (City Lights), and the bookend that would surely doom the work in the middle, in comparative terms. The fact that Chaplin received an Academy Award for “versatility and genius in acting, writing, directing and producing” The Circus, almost seems beside the point, when factoring in that Chaplin was removed for official competition in four competitive categories to pave the way for the one win. The film did reasonably well at the box office, though not nearly as impressively as The Gold Rush.
Chaplin explained the advent of The Circus in interviews. It sprang from the central image of a tight rope walker being severely tested by a brood of monkeys who pulled down his pants and grope at his face while he’s trying to maintain his balance in a dangerous situation. The entire film was built around this central idea, and the finished product ultimately bears some striking similarities with his 1916 mutual short “The Vagabond” which concerns a young girl who is victimized and brutalized by a gypsy in a romantic triangle that features thwarted romance with a heroine. The film begins with a credit sequence that is underscored by Chaplin himself, who at 81 years old was still the singer of choice for the lovingly nostalgic “Swing Little Girl” that immediately sets the melancholic tone of the film that is fully consummated in the arresting finale when Charlie says goodbye to the wagons on the move. One of the reasons why Chaplin is considered the consummate genius is that he wrote and often performed his own scores, one of which was the unforgettable composition he created for Modern Times, one which yielded the universally adored song “Smile”, covered over many decades. Chaplin’s melodic gift was remarkable, but importantly it underscored his laughter with a pathos that never lost sight that life was economically tough. Much like his two great comic clown contemporaries, Buster Keaton and Harold Lloyd, Chaplin knew that laughter always came at a price, a fact he brought to full fruition in the tragicomedy City Lights, arguably his supreme masterpiece. In any event, Chaplin’s late life reconciliation with The Circus is a testament to the film’s enduring popularity and Chaplin’s private admission that in this case the end justified the means.
A traveling amusement park circus is turning off patrons with lame and redundant gags that include dancing on a turntable. Men yawn and read newspapers, while a younger boy screams out “rotten.” Meanwhile Charlie, like many of his generation, is out of work and is suffering the pangs of economic deprivation. He is the unwilling recipient of a wallet of money that was placing on his possession by a pickpocket who is running from the police. Prior to his own discovery of the scam he smiles at a baby who is munching on a hot dog while be held over his father’s shoulder. Charlie, unseen by the father, takes a few bites on the baby’s snack, while making faces to keep the toddler smiling, and even spreads some mustard on the dog he continues to eat. When the theft victim, an older man who has been searching for the person who robbed him, sees Charlie pull out his wallet he alerts a nearby policemen. Charlie, realizing he was set up then takes off, closely followed by the cop, and joined in escape by the pickpocket. Charlie enters a fun house, temporarily evading capture by losing himself in a hall of mirrors that dumbfounds the policeman. He slips back out and plays the role of the automoton, turning with mechanical agility, clutching his cane and turning periodically to laugh on cue. It’s one of the tramp’s most inspired moments and the laughter of course is mainly generated by his success in going undetected. Charlie and the cop burst through the tent flaps and onto the turntable, both darting in and out between the circus performers. The audience immediately responds with frenzied laughter, which is accentuated when Charlie continues to pop up in boxes that are part of a magician’s act. Eventually the magician’s full paraphernalia becomes part of the feigned performance, and the idea that the humor is completely accidental and unplanned is recognized by the film’s viewers but not by the circus audiences who of course have no idea Charlie’s antics are really a spillover from real life. The audience screams for “the Funny Man” after they again are regaled by the dullards who pose themselves as professional clowns. Of course the viewer is torn between their realization that the vagrant who is manufacturing laughs as an overlapper who is unknown by the circus patrons, is really not funny at all, but the man who plays him is perhaps the greatest comedic genius the film world has ever known. Charlie is quickly discovered by the opportunistic circus manager, a brutal slave driver who uses his ringmaster’s whip on his daughter, whenever her bareback riding did not live up to his expectations, and is instructed to show up the next morning to strut his stuff. Needless to say in tune with the film’s theme, humor is rarely achieved by practice, and the hapless tramp is a failure at this on demand test run. His vaudeville waddle is a disaster and the ringmaster orders him to watch the clowns do a William Tell routine, which is purposely compromised by the one who is to have the apple on his head keep pulling it off to take a bite from it. This is followed by a barber-shop routine, where buckets of lather are sloshed all over the place, and charlie is beside himself with laughter over a stunt that we in the audience know is not funny, nor really is intended to be. The funny part is when Charlie accidentally paints the ringmaster’s face with lather, an assault that temporarily terminates him, yet what leads to that point includes other lame gags that are so bad that they actually brings some laughter. One, has Charlie replace the apple on his head with a flat banana.
Charlie is rehired, fired, and then rehired again as a “property man” when the ringmaster ups the ante for deception, instructing another worker from letting Charlie know he has become the hit of the show, after a continued act of having a mule chase him into the ring, caused dishware to scatter. For continued encores over months charlie never realizes he’s the real star until the girl tells him. Charlie claims he knew it, but in fact he was completely clueless. For the audience, that revelation is genuinely funny. That leads to us to the film’s most celebrated set pieces: the first in a lion cage, which was actually a dangerous shoot. Chaplin did appear in a real lion’s cage, and his consternation was spontaneous and unfeigned. Then the stunt that was the idea from which the entire film emanated – the climactic tight rope sequence that boasts Chaplin’s amazing agility and inspired the pantomines that the actor-director claims were spontaneous.
That the tramp is left alone at the end, when his romantic interest marries and leaves with his blessing, injects this comedy of errors the sense of poignancy that elevates the material to the realm of pathos and solitude, and a reminder that success is often a mistake and is always fleeting. Chaplin’s The Circus boasts what may well be the funniest opening real in the icon’s catalogue, and then it proceeds in connecting the human elements that transform this extraordinary film into a story of loss and loneliness. Chaplin, ever aware that comedy is most resonant when it is played off deep emotions, fuels this early feature with a new definition of comedy and how it practically goes hand and hand with what some might consider failure and ineptitude. The Circus, alas is anything but.






Sam, The Circus has fascinated me ever since I read Walter Kerr’s critical discussion of the film in The Silent Clowns. In Kerr’s account, Chaplin set an insurmountable challenge for himself in trying to get humor out of the Tramp succeeding accidentally but failing while deliberately attempting to be a clown. A meta-comedy, if you will, and the film impresses me on that level, but it also succeeds as one of his most visually interesting pictures, especially the first reel or so and the ending. And while it shouldn’t really count, The Circus is enhanced for me by the extended “deleted scene” in the Unknown Chaplin documentary in which Charlie, conscious of his tenuous stardom, tries to stage-manage an incident to make himself a hero and eclipse his rival in the girl’s eyes. It’s a measure of Chaplin’s standards that he could leave such stuff on the cutting-room floor.
Samuel, I adore Kerr’s volume, and I always refer to it when sizing up any one of Chaplin’s, Keaton’s or Lloyd’s works.. It is a seminal work loaded with insights and scholarly application. I did of course also read of that “insurmountable challenge” you speak of. Yes, the opening reel is utterly masterful, as is the powerful finale. I did watch the deleted scene yet again this week and agree it would never have wound up on anyone else’s cutting room floor. UNKNOWN CHAPLIN is a masterpiece on it’s own. Thanks as always my friend for the terrific embellishment.
Sam, you did a great job defending this film and describing its most enjoyable moments. Just about any work by Chaplin is bound to delight, and while this one does that, for me it doesn’t come up to the best of Chaplin’s silents. I first saw this just a week or two after seeing “The Gold Rush,” and the difference between the two in the overall quality of the movie and the consistency of inspiration was quite apparent. Your discussion of Chaplin’s difficulties getting the film made while enduring drastic personal problems might help explain the film’s inconsistency. Your post did remind me just how strong the beginning of the film is, with some truly creative gags even for Chaplin (especially the business with the giant turntable). But I find that it loses its momentum after a while. It’s been awhile since I last saw this, but I seem to recall that the focus of attention shifts for a while away from Chaplin around the middle and it occurred to me while watching that this diminished the film. Still, it’s hard to find fault with the inclusion in the countdown of anything directed by Chaplin.
R.D.: Thanks so much for the wonderful compliments and exceeding insights. While it’s clear I do like this film a good deal more than you, I respect your astute reasons for feeling the way you do, and acknowledgement that among Chaplin devotees the jury is still out. Still, the film’s reputation has risen in recent years, and laugh for laugh it still seems one of his most distinguished works. Still, I would agree the film’s middle lags a bit, and nothing can match the opening reel, though the film rallies gloriously in a big emotional way at the end. True what you say about THE GOLD RUSH, a masterpiece few comedies in history can match. As you note some of the personal difficulties can be held at least partially responsible for Chaplin’s unease during the production. And yes, any Chaplin film that makes teh countdown can hardly be contested. Thanks very much my friend.
I’ve loved this film since I saw it years ago on Laserdisc (released as part of a celebration for Chaplin’s 100th birthday) and have re-watched it annually ever since.
Chaplin is that figure from the past I am most fascinated and admired of (the other two would be Beethoven and Theodore Roosevelt) because of the ernest and honest belief in his own prowess of creativity, self belief and talent. He is a breathless entertainer, endless imaginator and had a real sense of the brilliantly simple (that the seed that brought THE CIRCUS to fruition was a simple idea of a man on a tightrope trying to keep his balance as the rope is crowded by monkeys is fascinating). Yet, he was slow to come to a concept for his features and this often played out as bankrolled time for his actors and crew that would wait at his studio for days on end while the master brooded at home, pacing back and forth, trying to come up with an original and showstopping idea. This seems to be the case with the history of THE CIRCUS but it was not a singular occurance and many of his subsequent films (particularly CITY LIGHT, his greatest masterpiece) suffered the same bloated budget and months wasted while the famed director/performer and composer sweated it out, alone, at home.
That Chaplin was best under pressure seems to make itself evident in the time starting with his shorts (some of his most inspired work) and up to, and including, MODERN TIMES (his last TRUE masterpiece). By the time he finished TIMES, he had found himself in a place of unparalelled wealth and was able to call his next project when it suited him. Starting with THE GREAT DICTATOR, Chaplin began to plan out his films and their gags extensively, laboring for months over them, and, ultimately seeing them lack the forced inspiration that made his earlier work so clever and ernest. THE CIRCUS is one of a group of films that took Chaplin hostage and the pressure to produce was of a high hysteria. However, as noted, this seems to be the kind of professional and creative environment that he trived on and THE CIRCUS is one of the glorious triumphs of his best period in film-making.
Lots have been said about how the emotion of his films weighs down the laughs, and its this that causes so many critics and historians to seem to prefer the “purer” work of Keaton and Lloyd (who were more about the gag and the laughs derived by the nifty stories and situations-myself? I always thought Keaton and Lloyd were a little too smart and imaginative for their own good). However, what Chaplin pressured himself over, during those long hours of pacing back and forth, was the insistance of adding the human element, the feeling that we are seeing us up on the screen. It is this, more than anything else, that defines Chaplin as both a voice of the people that he was creating entertainment for, and the artist that expressed what we were all feeling, or wished we felt, with the shinanigans or the heroic bravura that makes “The Little Tramp” so much a part of who WE are. THE CIRCUS was, and remains one of Chaplins purest “Chaplin” films and all the headaches caused by it and its creation were weathered long enough to hear the applause and the gratefulness WE had for him for making it.
THE CIRCUS is a great, GREAT film….
Thanks Dennis.
You know I didn’t even realize that I didn’t say it…. I must’ve been on drugs….
I think it goes without saying, Schmulee, you wrote a wonderful piece here!!!!!
Dennis thanks very much for the exceedingly kind words my friend!
Dennis and Sam, I need to see more of all the silent clowns, but I’m already aware that for me Chaplin is definitely the one, so to speak. I wasn’t sure quite why I liked him more than Keaton and Lloyd, great though they are too of course, but a light went on for me when reading Dennis’s comment here, in particular, “Lots have been said about how the emotion of his films weighs down the laughs.” I think that weighting is probably what gives him such a strong draw for me, speaking as a Dickens fanatic – it’s a similar mix of humour and emotion. Always a lot to think about reading through one of these threads.
Thanks for the terrific addition Judy! Yes Dennis did make some splendid points that I can agree with full force. And it would be difficult to deny Chaplin the top spot even if Keaton and Lloyd are real close.
A very good print of the complete movie is on Vimeo http://vimeo.com/19651493
Nice. I just availed myself of some of it.
Thanks very much for adding the link Tony! I see we already have one customer, but I’m sure they’ll be many others.
Yep wonderful stuff Sam and you have great knowledge of Chaplin’s work. I think it’s his 4th best film, behind Modern Times, City Lights, and The Gold Rush. I would personally place this film in the second half of the top 100 if I had a ballot that went that far. It’s a very funny and touching film and I kind of like the ending here where he Doesn’t get the girl, as opposed to City Lights and Modern Times that followed. I personally think that each film from The Gold Rush through The Great Dictator is pure genius. I’m not as high on Monsieur Verdoux, but that doesn’t mean it’s a fine film as well. The Circus certainly deserves more attention and I’m glad to see such high placement here.
Jon—-
I appreciated the flattering words, and various insights, including the end when Chaplin doesn’t get the girl. There is certainly a dark undercurrent here, and as I explained in the review it makes the comedy more human, and well-earned. I also agree what you say there about that masterpieces run Chaplin had, and for you and for me it does indeed include THE CIRCUS. I was thrilled to see it finish as high as it did on the countdown. Thanks again my friend!
I voted this film at Number 29 on my ballot, so my own feelings on it are clear enough. I would have to agree it belongs in the top 4 Sam, and I commend you for writing a terrific review, not only in defending it’s inclusion but also in taking us through a guided tour of why it works and how the humor and pathos are interwoven. There are brilliant gags and the story is bitterweet. Typically your discussion of the score Chaplin later wrote, and that lead song you provide the lyrics for is especially impassioned. This is one of my favorite reviews of the countdown.
Peter—As always I must thank you for the lovely words and support! Thrilled to hear you also believe it belongs in the Top 4, a position also endorsed here by Jon Warner. Appreciate the ‘guided tour’ nod, and couldn’t agree more on the ‘comedy and pathos’ being deftly interwoven. Thrilled at your enthusiasm for the score and opening song! Thanks again my friend!
Really enjoyed reading your thoughts on this film, Sam. This is one I only saw for the first time recently, as TCM screened it this summer as part of “The Essentials, Jr.,” their fantastic series that introduces classics to younger generations. I found it entertaining, but I have to echo R.D.’s comment and admit that, to me, it did not feel as though it is quite on par with other Chaplin silents. It’s funny that you should mention that Chaplin had to “smuggle” the film away to avoid it being seized by his wife’s divorce attorneys; I recall reading that he had to do something similar with his earlier film The Kid when Wife #1, Mildred Harris, filed for divorce.
Thanks very much Brandie for the very kind words and support! I never realized that TCM just recently screened it, and hoped many got to see it. As I stated to R.D. I completely understand and respect that there are some compelling issues that might be a stumbling block for naming this as one of Chaplin’s greatest works. For sure as much as I love it I don’t put it with THE GOLD RUSH, which preceded it. I had read that about THE KID too and thank you for adding it. Seems like Chaplin had more than his share of troubles at that time. Thanks again my friend!
Sam, thanks for such an insightful and excellent essay on the film. I was not aware of the production issues and it is remarkable that the film managed to be completed given all that took place. It is certainly underrated something which surprized me when I first saw the film and was bowled over by it. I could not believe this The Circus was not talked about in the same vein as the other Chaplin films you mention. I ranked it as my #3 Chaplin film in the countdown.
Sachin—-
Thanks very much for the exceedingly kind words. Yes, as you can see even on this very thread THE CIRCUS is contested for the inner sanctum of Chaplin masterpieces, though everyone agrees it at least has some extraordinary sequences. My reaction to the film upon first and subsequent viewings is the same as yours. There’s some deep feeling here and sure timelessness. Thanks again my friend!
A wonderful piece, Sam. I’ve really only been getting into Chaplin in the last couple of years and must say this is probably the film of his I had the most sheer enjoyment in watching, because it really goes from one great set piece to another, as you say – the ending on the tightrope with the monkeys is just astonishing and I was interested to learn from you that this was the inspiration for the film, and that there were so many retakes! i also love the scene in the lion’s den and the great first reel. A masterpiece, as you say!
Judy—
Your flattering words are deeply appreciated. I am thrilled to hear that you feel so strongly about THE CIRCUS. It does seem remarkable how the entire film was fleshed out from that single idea, though in an of itself it was one of Chaplin’s most inspired gags. I hear there were over 70 takes! The lion’s den sequence does have special value in the sense that Chaplin was genuinely terrified. I completely agree with you that this film is one great set piece after another, all held together by the human story and the underlining pathos. Thanks again my friend!
Sam – A QUICK HELLO FROM SAN MIGUEL DE ALLENDE, MEXICO WHILE MY INTERNET CONNECTIONS HOLDS
Hello Laurie!!!! I have much to share with you when you return related to the unfortunate event here in the NYC area, but things are improving. My father is still without power, but he’s been staying at Lucille’s school at night. Look forward to hearing about the Mexican trip!!! Thanks so much!!!
Astute and funny piece here, Sam — your recollections of the great gags had me laughing out loud as I read. And, of course, the film’s melancholy ending never fails to burst my heart.