Talk:Monsieur Verdoux

The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

Film: Core / American

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is on the project's core list.
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

Comedy High‑importance

	Comedy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Cinema Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Film portal This article is supported by WikiProject Film - American cinema task force (assessed as High-importance).

Fair use rationale for Image:Monsieur verdoux57.jpg

Image:Monsieur verdoux57.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 04:48, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Academy Awards – 1947

Award	Result	Winner
Best Writing, Original Screenplay	Nominated	Charlie Chaplin Winner was The Bachelor and the Bobby-Soxer - Sidney Sheldon

Award	Nominee
Best Motion Picture	Charlie Chaplin
Best Director	Charlie Chaplin
Best Actor	Charlie Chaplin
Best Actress	Mady Correll
Best Supporting Actor	[[]]
Best Supporting Actress	[[]]
Best Art Direction - Set Decoration (Black-and-White)	John Beckman
Best Cinematography (Black-and-White)	Roland Totheroh
Best Film Editing	Willard Nico
Best Music (Score in a Dramatic or Comedy Picture)	Charlie Chaplin and Rudy Schrager
Best Sound Recording	James T. Corrington
Best Special Effects	[[]]

Odd statement

The following quote from the entry seems a little odd to me: "The film and its dark themes were ill-suited to the American political and cultural climate of the time (less than two years after World War II ended)" I can understand, perhaps, that the movie was poorly received in the United States for various cultural or political reasons. But to parenthetically cite World War II as a reason for that climate makes no sense since the movie was popular in Europe, as indicated by the entry. Didn't Europe also suffer through World War II?74.138.45.132 (talk) 22:47, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, they just sat around while John Wayne and Randolph Scott did all the heavy lifting. EEng (talk) 07:21, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fred Karno Jr.

Son of the English music impressario Fred Karno, for whom Chaplin worked in his earlier years, is employed in the wedding reception scene as "Mr. Karno". 31.50.16.111 (talk) 04:12, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Cited source does not reference Welles' opinion as stated

The sentence 'Welles believed that a version directed by him would have been better, as he considered Chaplin a "genius" as an actor, but merely competent as a director.' is unsupported by the cited text, and no opinion of the sort appears elsewhere as far as I have seen. The source refers to Welles' chagrin at having his script overwritten and his directional request overruled, but there is absolutely no implication that he considers Chaplin 'merely competent'. While he does trumpet Chaplin's acting elsewhere, the term 'genius' is not used. I will remove the offending sentence from the article. 46.237.173.210 (talk) 13:41, 4 June 2020 (UTC)xe[reply]

Reception section

Hi All,

I feel that this sentence in the Reception section is unclear & could be worded better, "The film was popular in France, where it had admissions of 2,605,679.[13]" The exact number is not necessary, it could be worded, 'The film was popular in France where it had an initial box office draw of over 2 million.' Or the same sentence with 'nearly 3 million.' instead. Obviously these statements should be checked with the referenced source. However, the link for Reference #13 points to 1963 films & this is a 1947 film. Thanks. SaturnCat (talk) 07:16, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]