Une idylle aux champs

Charlie Chaplin's satirical streak was not reserved solely for pompous authority figures with big bellies and wispy beards. He was not averse to turning his wit outwards and directing it at the very production style and process he himself was a part of. Sunnyside does not lampoon the movie industry – rather it makes a joke out of the Chaplin brand which the comic, eager to move on to more sophisticated feature films, was beginning to grow weary of.

Chaplin had practically invented the narrative slapstick comedy, but here he belittles the storytelling aspects that were now a comedy standard, curtailing descriptions of characters and places with "etc, etc, etc" and using a title card to bluntly announce the romantic subplot. Throughout the picture he makes use of his now most clichéd plot devices – the abused employee, the sophisticated love rival, the "it-was-all-a-dream" revelation – and, of course, numerous examples of his stock slapstick manoeuvre, the kick up the arse.

And yet, it appears Chaplin was incapable of deliberately making a bad picture. There are plenty of decent gags here, especially those at the beginning where Charlie thwarts his employer's attempts to get him out of bed. And even at the height of his sarcasm and hyperbole it seems Chaplin cannot help but work in gags and sub-gags which are genuinely funny. And for all its narrative laziness, Sunnyside is actually strong in its visual storytelling, beginning with the iris on the church spire to set the tone, then opening up the iris to reveal an exquisitely balanced shot of the village. And even the rushed ending is among Chaplin's sweetest in its delicate imagery.

And there's more; the all important statistic – Number of kicks up the arse: 24 (2 for, 22 against – can this be a record?)

It's somewhat uneven, and you'd probably say that it's interesting rather than good, but "Sunnyside" is still worth seeing if you like Charlie Chaplin's short comedies. A couple of the sequences are very enjoyable, but others don't really work that well, and just take up time.

Rather than his usual tramp character, Charlie plays a put-upon farmhand and handyman who has some of the same characteristics, and the story combines some conventional slapstick with some more imaginative sequences. Some of the material is quite good, especially the sequence with Charlie and the horse doctor treating a patient. But not all of it comes off equally well, and it bogs down at times. It's only average among Chaplin's many short comedies, and not quite as good as most of the later ones, but it has enough to be worth seeing.

Sunnyside reminds me of some of the early films in Alfred Hitchcock's career, like Rich & Strange or The Skin Game, which are curiosity pieces both because they come from such massive directors and are still so empty and disappointing. Like some of Hitch's early films, Sunnyside for Charlie Chaplin represents to me a point in his early career when he was testing the waters and still trying to find out what he is really best at doing.

Some people were disappointed that Chaplin forced the Tramp into the unlikely role of a farmhand, forgetting that the very nature of the Tramp is that he is such an everyman that he can be placed in virtually every different kind of situation, from brick-layer to World War I soldier, and Chaplin can use his particular brand of comedy to deliver his clever political themes and brilliant slapstick.

Some of the situations and sequences don't work so well or run as smoothly as many of Chaplin's more famous ones, and there is a bizarre sequence involving some dancing nymphs, but it is interesting to consider how this early, experimental film foreshadows the work that Chaplin did later in much more famous and highly superior films like City Lights and The Kid. Throughout the film are what may be taken as examples of the exasperation that Chaplin has admitted to having during the production of the film, but to call is a total loss is missing the mark completely. Certainly not the best of Chaplin's early short films, but I don't think Chaplin ever made a real failure.

While this is certainly not a bad film and is entertaining to watch, compared to other Chaplin shorts, it's a bit of a let-down. Part of this is because there aren't as many laughs as usual and part of it was that the characters just didn't seem that engaging--something a little unusual for a Chaplin short made this late in his career. Plus, for me, it was a little hard to accept the Little Tramp as a farm hand--he just seemed really out of place and a bit lost. Later, when the rich guy appears and Charlie thinks he's going to lose his girl to this dandy, the movie seems a little more familiar, but still it failed to grab hold of my attention. Not a bad film, but Chaplin certain did better.

When one considers this to have been made in1919, it's a remarkable effort. Chaplin plays his little tramp who seems to work on a farm. But he works at a hotel which sells groceries. He is quite dreamy and incompetent and so suffers punishment at the hand of his boss. How many times can a man be kicked in the rear? There is a wonderful dream sequence where Charlie imagines some nymphs on a bridge. He shows off his incredible grace and dancing skills Of course, he has been knocked unconscious and the reality isn't that great. He also has a love interest. She is very tolerant of him. But factors enter in. The conclusion is quite unsatisfying. But it's OK when one considers all the fun we get to see.