Charlie Chaplin´s Burlesque on Carmen   next   previous

Burlesque on Carmen Clippings 100/101

Wid‘s Daily, New York, July 13, 1918.

Orpheum, exterior by day, marquee Charlie Chaplin in Carmen,

Cleveland, Ohio

(...) Motion Picture News, May 1, 1920

& Favorite Films Corporation

      Charles Chaplin in His Comedy Super-Play

      „Burlesque on Carmen“

      with

      An Original Musical Arrangement of Bizet‘s Carmen

US lobby card, re-release 1918, Library of Congress

„Chaplin Answers“

Editorial content. „Chaplin Answers Essanay in

      Suit Over Broken Contract

      Comedian Makes Counterclaim for $216,250

      – Asserts His Reputation Was Damaged

      The answer of Charlie Chaplin in the suit of the Essanay

Film Mfg. Co. to recover damages for breach

of contract, has been filed in the Supreme Court by his attorney,

Nathan Burkan. Chaplin not only denies that he owes

the plaintiff anything for leaving it, but makes a counter claim

for $216,000 and accuses the Essanay of injuring

his reputation and income by certain alleged acts set forth

in his answer.

      Chaplin alleges as the chief defence of the breach of contract allegation that the contract was made in California

and was to be performed there, and that under the laws of that

State the contract sued on, which was changed

by an agreement between the parties, is not valid. He then

alleges that photoplays made and originated by him

were wide and favorably known as Chaplin comedies or Chaplin

photoplays, and in the agreement between the parties

it was understood and agreed that the scenarios used under

his name were to be devised by him and he was

to be the chief actor.

      Agreement Outlined

      He says the chief merit of his photoplays consists of his

skill in devising and arranging scenes so as to create

amusement. He alleges that under the agreement between

the parties for a year from January 1, 1915, he was

to direct the making of films and each production was not

to contain less than 1,000 feet. They were to be

distinctly designed as the ,Chaplin Brand‘ or ,Chaplin Comedy‘

and no films were to be released under that brand until

they had been approved by him. He says that in pursuance

of the contract he originated and created scenarios for

two-reel plays adapted to his style and talent.

      Chaplin says that one of these plays was called Charlie

Chaplin‘s Burlesque on Carmen, which he completed

December 10, 1915. He alleges that the plaintiff in violation of

his rights as author caused the play to be lengthened

to a four-reel play and padded it by ,interpolated scenes

discarded by the defendant because they were

repetitions of scenes previously used and also rejected

because of inferiority and unsuitability.‘ He also

says the plaintiff caused isolated scenes to be taken for

this play in which ,one Turpin‘ who did not appear

in the original play, was a participant.

      Claims Picture Was Altered

      The plaintiff called the four-reel play a ,Chaplin Comedy‘

and after it had been unlawfully altered the plaintiff

advertised and sold it extensively throughout the United

States. He alleges that the interpretation destroyed

the merit of the production and made it uninteresting and

injured the defendant because he appeared less

frequently than the public expected. In this way his reputation

as an author, producer and star was damaged.

      For his first counterclaim, Chaplin alleges that on the

execution of the agreement he was to get $25,000

and for the production of two-reel comedies under the contract

of December 13, 1915, he was to have a weekly salary

of $1,250 during the making of the picture, a bonus of $10,000

on the completion, and 50 per cent, on the net earnings

after the $25,000 and the cost of production had been deducted.

      Concerning Payments

      He alleges that he produced a two-reel comedy, Police,

and was engaged on it to January 22, 1916, and alleges

that $16,250 of the sum due was not paid and that the plaintiff

had a net income from the play of $200,000, of which

he is entitled to $100,000.

      For a second counterclaim of $100,000 Chaplin alleges

that the plaintiff put together isolated scenes to make

it appear that the defendant had appeared in the action of a

,patched-up‘ play which was called Chase Me Charlie.

He alleges that the plaintiff realized $100,000 from this play

and that he was damaged $100,000 through the act of

the plaintiff in making it appear he had produced it.“

      Counterclaim.

      Essanay‘s Carmen Fake.

      Charlie Chaplin‘s Burlesque on Carmen.

      Police.

      Chase Me Charlie.

 

Redaktioneller Inhalt

 Charlie Chaplin´s Burlesque on Carmen   next   previous