Horst in Translation ([email protected]) This, of course, refers to the title character (who appeared already before this one in films) in this 27-minute black-and-white silent short film from over 100 years ago. Chaplin reprised this role several times later, also in his most famous full feature films. The action in this film takes place mostly at a farm. The Tramp helps the farmer and his daughter (Edna Purviance, who is a regular in Chaplin movies) deal with a bunch of crooks who try to burgle the place. Chaplin, at one point, acts as if he would cooperate with them and get 50% of the money the steal, but it's all fake. The truth is that he is madly in love with the farmer's daughter. Unfortunately, at the very end, her fiancé appears and I felt sorry for the Tramp, but also for myself because I sat through this half hour which really wasn't that great. i did not feel that they had enough material for half an hour and the criminals also became a bit repetitive quickly. I usually like it if they include something beyond Chaplin's slapstick comedy routine, but here it wasn't working or I should maybe say it could have worked if they had kept it at 20 minutes max or come up with a better elaborated story with more depth. Not one of Chaplin's best. Not recommended.

Steffi_P Were the films of Charlie Chaplin stagey because he employed long takes and few camera moves? No! There is something else you can have on screen that you can't on stage beside camera-work and edits, and that is the field of depth. From early on Chaplin had learnt how to use depth to give his little tramp character the kind of entrances and exits that you couldn't have in the theatre, ones that stretched off into the distance, allowing him to gradually appear on the scene and make the most of that now-familiar walk. In the Tramp, he created his most iconic image, that of the tramp sauntering up and later plodding away down a winding country lane.Such a great and memorable entrance is important for the more structured story lines that Chaplin was now starting to build. Whereas most of the Essanay shorts this far had simply taken a setting in which Charlie could run wild, the Tramp seems to have been constructed plot first, with the funny business appearing along the way. Far from diluting the comedy, this actually improves the material. For example, the middle section in which Charlie causes havoc on the farm, might a few months earlier have been the basis for an entire short – "The Farmhand", perhaps – but now Chaplin is able to condense the best gags of the situation down to one segment which can be woven into the overall story.The Tramp ends on a note of poignancy – something that was unheard of in screen comedy at the time. But all that Chaplin is doing is recognising something that has been established for centuries. Shakespeare knew it, and so did Dickens. Tragedy affects us more when it appears amongst comedy, and the moment that Chaplin creates here is touching and bittersweet. He even throws in one last gag to stop the moment from becoming too strained.This isn't quite the funniest of Chaplin's Essanay pictures, but it is the first mature and truly beautiful thing he had yet created.And finally, that all important statistic – Number of kicks up the arse: 5 (2 for, 1 against, 2 other)

CitizenCaine Chaplin edited, wrote, directed, and starred in this film, a milestone for Chaplin and perhaps film comedy. It was not his first appearance as the tramp, but it was certainly his first appearance as the tramp that everyone still recognizes today. Gone is the aggressive Chaplin of old, always scheming and trying to put one over on people. Here he has a chance to do just that early in the film and chooses not to. It's as if Chaplin recognized his chance to branch out in another direction. He saves Edna Purviance from thieves and goes to her father's farm where he is given a job. Comical mishaps ensue with a pitchfork, and the tramp is not cut out to be a farmhand. The thieves return and are run off with the tramp's help, but the tramp is accidentally shot in the confusion. He eventually recovers thinking he'll marry the farmer's daughter, but he finds out she has a beau already(Lloyd Bacon, the Warner Brothers director). The tramp writes a goodbye letter and leaves. The film is consistent in tone and well edited. As in most of Chaplin's better films, the slapstick is reined in in favor of a plot or story. The ending with its simultaneous pathos and optimism is a Chaplin trademark. **1/2 of 4 stars.

hausrathman Charlie plays a tramp, who, after saving a farmer's daughter from thieves, is given a job on the farm as a reward. Charlie later manages to thwart the same bandits who try to rob the farm, but he is accidently shot in the process by the farmer. Charlie basks in the attention of the farmer, and his daughter, until the girl's boyfriend arrives. Knowing he doesn't have a chance with the girl anymore, Charlie leaves, walking down the road alone."The Tramp" was made for Essanay, who gave Chaplin his second film contract in as many years and much greater creative freedom than he previously enjoyed under Mack Sennett at Keystone. Despite claims to the contrary, this film was not introduction of Chaplin's famous tramp character. That character was actually born in Chaplin's second film for Keystone "Kid Auto Races in Venice." This film was, however, an important step in the development of the tramp as a character, and for Chaplin as an artist. With his failed attempt to win the girl and his final walk, with his back to us, down the road, Chaplin made his first serious attempt to inject pathos and genuine human emotion into his comedies. In "The Tramp," he was laying the groundwork for future masterpieces like "The Circus."Sadly, aside from the dramatic elements, this isn't one of Chaplin's best shorts. The comedy isn't very original. He simply takes advantage of various barnyard props for the rough, rather mindless knockabout brand of slapstick he would soon evolve away from. This isn't a terrible comedy by any means, it probably as good if not better than the bulk of the comedies produced that year by his contemporaries. It simply doesn't live up to the standard he would set for himself over the next two years at the Mutual Company.Fans should definitely watch if they get the chance, but it isn't a good place for the uninitiated to start.