CHRIST & NAPOLEON

Hokitika Guardian, 7 April 1930, Page 8

CHRIST & NAPOLEON

“WHY I WANT TO PLAY THEM.”

(By Charles Chaplin.)

There are two characters 1 would like most to play, and they are Christ and Napoleon. 1 mean it. I would like to play them both. And I believe my ideas would give the world a new conception of these two great men.

Take the ease of Napoleon. I woidd not portray him as the mighty general, hut as an undersized, gloomy, silent almost morose individual who is always iii trouble with members of his family Heavens! there is humour tlmvigho.it all his life! His efforts to marry off his brothers and sisters .and step-chi'd-re.n, and keep on good terms with his mother and his wife, and fight a levwars in the meantime, provide a wealth of material for a play. T would not burlesque him, you understand, but I’d re-enact all the mesises he got into and his efforts to extricate himself .and keep peace in. the family. I’d show him on the way to Italy to he crowned king—show hi.s march to the throne with Josephine. Napoleon was more or less pompous, you know. T-Io liked a bit of display. As for drama and pathos, the story would be replete with both.

LTMTTLESS DRAMA

Take, for example, his break with Josephine. First we have the Emperor calling her to him and telling her that she must go—she, the Josephine who had aided him and stood beside him and believed in him and helped him. Then I’d show her in the palace the last night, counting off the hours, the minutes —taking the last look at things in the palace which had been her home. And when the time for departure came I’d show her throwing her cloak about her and going slowly out into the night to step silently into a brougham and he driven away. In another scene I’d show her listening as the booming of the guns announced the birth of Napoleon’s child, counting the shots, twenty if it be a girl, twenty-one if it is a boy. Pathos? It’s unsurpassed! As for drama, it would be limitless Take the return of Napoleon from banishment on the lonely Isle of Elba his gathering of an army, his march to Paris. I’d show the old ' guardsmen flocking to his side, the flag-waving, the brilliant ovations, the military reawakening. I’d show, lor example, a veteran with a peg leg, an arm gone, blind in one eye, hobbling ahead to shout the warning, “Napoleon is com ing! Napoleon is back! Napoleon is moving on Paris! Stop him! Kill him before he once more drenches your sons in blood!” Then I’d have that growing army march into view with the little Corsican at its heads, the band playing the “Marseillaise,” and on coming abreast of the mained and battle-scar ed veteran, Napoleon saluting. , Next I’d picture the old guardsman caught by the Emperor’s spell, throwing his hat into the air and, while tears of ioy went coursing down his cheeks, hobbling into line and pegging away with the column towards Paris. There is no end of dramatic situations which might be used in the picture. T’ve thought about it many, many times ; even made notes of the things T would use. I may make the film some time. I don’t know.

WORLD’S CONCEPTION ALL WRONG.

] have studied the Pible closely and read volume alter volume concerning it. lam conversant with all creeds.

The world, in my opinion has a wrong conception of the strongest, most dynamic, most powerful character who has ever lived. Christ was human. He was real. He was strength personfiod in flesh. And yet from the oldest paintings and drawings in Christain history down to the present day. He is pictured as a long-haired man wearing a white tunic, speaking in sepulchral voice and looking exceptionally weary and depressed. We are led to believe that He had had‘a demeanour worse than that of Shakespeare’s Hamlet. Frankly 1 don’t believe it. Christ was a powerful, strong-minded being who ate good food, drank good wine and enjoyed the companionship of hi; i fellows. He had a personality never equalled in all history. ' Why envision Him as an awesome, depressing, threatening figure* who moved ghostlike among the people, inculcating fear in their hearts? Thai isn’t the Christ as T see Him. 1 had rather look upon Him as a splendid, virile, red-blooded man to whom one would instinctively turn when in trouble and expect Him to wade in and make evildoers too the mark, and do it hard and fast. T want Him to be natural, one whose apb/irance among people would bring jov. One whose command would ho, when He was with a gather ino- to eat, drink, and he merrv. Te other words-, he a splendid living breathing, kindly man with nover t n pdemulate everv one and everything r.iulor everv eu'e i unstanre -

I’re not reyp'c this drespectfullv

rv t ii’trnd it oidv C ■' l Hu’t T believe Christ was a 'uar vie bVrfi red got pleasure in living His fellows. T do rot believe that Pontius Pilate "l-er intepdrd te slnv C'C "iff when bo dialed Him beiforo him. Pilnle heard the .fj-aree and eslvd : , “What shall we do with this man?”

MOP SACRIFICE

•led then some I'm! haek in the crowd eried; “CrurPv Him!” Some one renented it and the assemblage took up the cry. Mob psychology

ruler, and Christ, for no particular reason, was sacrificed.

If I were to put the story of Christ in’o the films, 1 would make him the !■ ingest, most outstanding personality possible; a great man who won the affection of the people by his strength and broadness. .1. would have Him welcomed with cries of delight by men and women and little children. They would press forward to be near and to feel His magnetism. There would be no long face, no sepulchral voice about him. Nor would there be anything to put fear in the hearts of his followers. On the other hand, He would' be made to appear the most kindly, most lovable, most upstanding and strongest individual the mind could conceive.

I don’t suppose I will ever put this story on the screen. It would likely bring forth a storm of criticism. Yet it would be of untold worth to the cause of religion in teaching that Christ was one to be loved; that He was human, and real and beautiful in eraraeter. 1 once saw Christ portrayed in a picture. I do not want to see it again. It was too unreal. I will probably never make this film of the New Testament. But, some day, I really may make “Napoleon”

CHAPLIN’S AMBITION. PARTS, March flO,

lita Grey, Charlie Chaplin’s former wife did not comment on Chaplin’s announcement cabled from America, “T’m not interested in Lita Grey or her travels.” Nevertheless Lita is still enjoyinsr reflected glory a.s Chaplin’s former wife. She informed Paris newspapers that CTnplin’s sole ambition, was to play Christ and Napoleon—“ Napoleon whom he visualises as sad, suffering, and .silent, Christ, whom lie visualies as a solid man, as well balanced physically as morally, eating and drinking well, and delighting in the company of kindred 1 -spirits.”