The Vagabond (1916)

• Year: 1916
• Released: 10 Jul 1916
• Country: United States
• Adwords: N/A
• IMDb: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0007507/
• Rotten Tomatoes: https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_vagabond
• Metacritics:
• Available in: 720p, 1080p,
• Language: None, English
• MPA Rating: N/A
• Genre: Short, Comedy, Drama
• Runtime: 24 min
• Writer: Charles Chaplin, Vincent Bryan, Maverick Terrell
• Director: Charles Chaplin
• Cast: Charles Chaplin, Edna Purviance, Eric Campbell
• Keywords: violin, painter, violinist,

	6.8/10
	74% – Critics
	74% – Audience

The Vagabond Storyline

An impoverished violinist falls for a beautiful gypsy girl. Together they meet an artist who paints the girl’s portrait. Charlie, the violinist, believes the girl loves the painter. Later, when a wealthy woman recognizes her long-ago- kidnapped daughter in the painting, she tracks down the girl with the artist’s help. The gypsy girl is taken back to her rightful heritage, leaving Charlie thinking she has gone off with the artist he thinks she loves. But has she? Does she?—Jim Beaver

The Vagabond Photos

The Vagabond Torrents Download

The Vagabond Subtitles Download

The Vagabond Movie Reviews

It’s a long way from Keystone: Charlie has evolved from scamp to hero

This is one of my favorite Chaplin comedies, but that doesn’t mean it’s one of his funniest. Gags notwithstanding, The Vagabond is decidedly the most serious film Chaplin had produced up to this time. You might say this short served as a dress rehearsal for his later features such as The Kid, films with melancholy story elements and (in some cases) sad endings. Here, Chaplin tells a melodramatic story in a straightforward fashion, elevating his Tramp to the role of hero. Having already proved that he could provoke laughter, it appears Chaplin wanted to see if he could inspire sympathy, enough so to draw viewers into a dramatic situation, and make them care about what happens to his “little fellow.” In my opinion he succeeded admirably, for watching this movie almost 90 years after it was released I find it still works beautifully, like a vintage automobile still in perfect working order.

Although this project marked a new chapter for Chaplin, he assembled it from decidedly old-fashioned ingredients. The plot must have felt familiar to audiences even in 1916: leading lady Edna Purviance plays a young woman kidnapped by gypsies as a child, held captive as their “drudge” ever since. Charlie is a traveling musician who rescues her – – after an exhilarating fight in which Edna takes part. Having fallen in love with her, he is prepared to take care of her forever after. However, the idyll is interrupted when a handsome young artist happens by and paints Edna’s portrait, which he takes back to the city to exhibit. Her wealthy mother sees the picture in a gallery, recognizes a distinctive birthmark, and realizes that the portrait’s subject is her daughter. With the artist in tow, the mother arrives at Charlie’s camp via automobile and brusquely takes her daughter away, leaving Charlie forlorn. Just as we’re bracing ourselves for a sad ending, Edna belatedly becomes aware of her feelings for Charlie, and orders the car to turn back and retrieve him.

As a lead-in to the melodrama concerning the gypsies, Chaplin gives us a comic opening sequence set in a saloon. Charlie, a busker with a violin, has a dispute with a band of musicians who are competing for coins from the same clientèle. But even here it’s striking how much Charlie has evolved since his Keystone days: when he pockets the coins intended for the combo it’s an honest mistake, that is, he sincerely believes the money is a reward for his performance, and when he’s confronted he doesn’t understand why, but promptly defends himself. Charlie is no longer the aggressor, no longer larcenous, drunk or rude: only two years after his screen debut, he’s matured into a likable character.

It’s to Chaplin’s credit that the recognition device with the birthmark, ever popular in the world of opera, is served up straight and somehow doesn’t feel hokey. Maybe that’s because The Vagabond plays like a dramatized folktale, what with its strolling minstrel, wicked gypsies, and damsel in distress; the birthmark feels just as natural in this context as Cinderella’s glass slipper or Rapunzel’s long hair. Charlie’s rescue of Edna and their escape together in one of the gypsies’ own wagons is a thrilling sequence, splendidly filmed and edited, belying those critics who insist that Chaplin the director was insufficiently “cinematic.” This is followed by a poignant scene set the next morning, when Charlie helps Edna clean herself up. The tone is gentle and the gags are mild, and by the time the scene ends we’re on his side. Charlie doesn’t have to be funny every moment he’s on screen. We’ve been won over: we care what happens to this guy and the girl he’s rescued. And when Edna’s head is turned by another man, and it looks like Charlie’s going to get jilted, it’s heart-breaking.

As I mentioned above, this is not the most laugh-packed comedy Chaplin ever made, but nonetheless I believe it’s one of his strongest short films, and therefore highly recommended to silent comedy buffs, and to anyone open to viewing great works from the cinema’s early days. Personally I feel that The Vagabond is Chaplin’s first masterpiece in the two-reel format.

Vagabond Charlie

Am a big fan of Charlie Chaplin, have been for over a decade now. Many films and shorts of his are very good to masterpiece, and like many others consider him a comedy genius and one of film’s most important and influential directors.

From his post-Essanay period when he was working for Mutual, ‘The Vagabond’ is not one of his very best or even among the best of this particular period. It and his Essanay period shows a noticeable step up in quality though from his Keystone period, where he was still evolving and in the infancy of his long career, from 1914, The Essanay and Mutual periods were something of Chaplin’s adolescence periods where his style had been found and starting to settle. ‘The Vagabond’ is among the best of his early work and for me it is the first great Chaplin short under Mutual.

Certainly other efforts of his have more pathos and a balance of that and the comedy than ‘The Vagabond’.

On the other hand, ‘The Vagabond’ looks pretty good, not incredible but it was obvious that Chaplin was taking more time with his work and not churning out countless shorts in the same year of very variable success like he did with Keystone. Appreciate the importance of his Keystone period and there is some good stuff he did there, but the more mature and careful quality seen here and later on is obvious here and preferred.

‘The Vagabond’ is one of his funniest from this period and does it without being over-reliant on slapstick. It moves quickly and there is a more discernible and busier story to usual, even if at times it could have had more variety.

Chaplin directs more than competently, if not quite cinematic genius standard yet. He also, as usual, gives an amusing and expressive performance and at clear ease with the physicality of the role. The supporting cast acquit themselves well, with a charming Edna Purviance and the chemistry between her and Chaplin.

Summing up, very well done. 9/10 Bethany Cox

Very good though it has a glaring plot problem

In 1914 and early 1915, Chaplin did his first comedy shorts. In general, they were pretty awful–with almost no plot and consisting of him mugging it up on camera and hitting people. However, in 1915 he left Keystone Studio and began making better films with Essenay (though there are some exceptions) and finally, in 1916, to Mutual where he made his best comedy shorts. These newer films had more plot and laughs and usually didn’t relay on punching or kicking when they ran out of story ideas.

This film tells a complete story–more so than almost any other Chaplin short. In fact, in many ways it is reminiscent of some of his later full-length films–in particular, THE CIRCUS. There were two problems with the film, though. One is a pretty lousy plot device on which the whole film relies. A woman was apparently stolen by gypsies as a little girl and later, as an adult, her portrait is painted and the girl’s biological mother recognizes this 20-something year-old as her long-lost daughter!!! Talk about unbelievable! The other problem is that in the version I saw from THE ESSENTIAL CHAPLIN COLLECTION, there were no title cards to explain the action. I had to read the box to get an idea of what was occurring! It’s a shame, as without these two problems, it would have been among Chaplin’s best shorts.