It's a sad thing to see a director not go out on the note that is most worthy of him/her. In the case of Charlie Chaplin, he did his usual auteur-touch (writer/director/producer/composer, in this case no significant acting) on a story that was, more or less, a trifle. If he had made another movie before he passed on, a great one perhaps, then it wouldn't be too much of a problem. But the pounding that critics gave him for 'Hong Kong' was pretty voracious, making it probably more-so about him than the actual film, as he had taken so long- as he had since City Lights- in making a movie that in truth wasn't to his usual standards. Some of the criticisms aren't totally fair (i.e. "directing style is tired"), and others are (i.e. "Brando was miscast"). It's very problematic, but at the same time it has moments that hint at the joy that Chaplin could conjure, and it shouldn't be completely disregarded as a disaster or train-wreck.
Is it dated? Sure. Chaplin sticks to old-fashioned filming techniques (however not too turgid or unwatchable as far as studio movies go from the period) and attitudes between men and women, almost despite the innuendo thrown in like in the scene between Loren and her "husband" in the bedroom with his peaks behind his covers. The premise is simple, as is usual for the director: an ambassador (Brando) is en route from Hong Kong, and a stowaway/'countess' (Loren) stays in his room. He keeps it all quiet, and despite being something of a stuff-shirt is generous, bringing her clothes (however not fitting) and food, and in the meantime as he tries to figure out how to get her to US shore without a passport, they fall in love. This last part, falling in love, is predictable and cliché and doesn't even quite work because of the short amount of time and razor-thin line between the two characters getting on each others nerves and feeling genuine affection.
To say that Brando was miscast goes with saying something else: other actors could have played his part, probably better, but at the least he does try his hardest to fit into this kind of stiff, repressed kind of turn, and in a sense does a good job if looking past his usual bravura being absent in place of what is required. It's just, well, compared to his best work that he falters here. Loren does a little better, albeit with only a little to do really with such a two-dimensional character with only vague plans once reaching American shores. And people like Sydney Chaplin and Tippi Hedren make their impressions on screen, but only for so long. And, sadly, a lot of jokes Chaplin hoped would probably hit off well like the sea-sick bit, or the repetitive "better hide!" moments Loren has to do to not be caught, fall flat. Only a few really catch on, like the scene where the old lady (the 'other' Natascha) is greeted by flowers and chocolates from a wrong admirer, or some of the scenes with the 'fake' husband and his idea of consummating the marriage.
These flaws pointed out, it isn't very dreadful an experience, and sometimes it's fun seeing Brando and Loren in their personality tug-of-war, plus the cheerful and usually spot-on Chaplin score. It's worth watching once... if not for more than that. It's a sad way to go, but it could've been worse. 5.5/10
Is it dated? Sure. Chaplin sticks to old-fashioned filming techniques (however not too turgid or unwatchable as far as studio movies go from the period) and attitudes between men and women, almost despite the innuendo thrown in like in the scene between Loren and her "husband" in the bedroom with his peaks behind his covers. The premise is simple, as is usual for the director: an ambassador (Brando) is en route from Hong Kong, and a stowaway/'countess' (Loren) stays in his room. He keeps it all quiet, and despite being something of a stuff-shirt is generous, bringing her clothes (however not fitting) and food, and in the meantime as he tries to figure out how to get her to US shore without a passport, they fall in love. This last part, falling in love, is predictable and cliché and doesn't even quite work because of the short amount of time and razor-thin line between the two characters getting on each others nerves and feeling genuine affection.
To say that Brando was miscast goes with saying something else: other actors could have played his part, probably better, but at the least he does try his hardest to fit into this kind of stiff, repressed kind of turn, and in a sense does a good job if looking past his usual bravura being absent in place of what is required. It's just, well, compared to his best work that he falters here. Loren does a little better, albeit with only a little to do really with such a two-dimensional character with only vague plans once reaching American shores. And people like Sydney Chaplin and Tippi Hedren make their impressions on screen, but only for so long. And, sadly, a lot of jokes Chaplin hoped would probably hit off well like the sea-sick bit, or the repetitive "better hide!" moments Loren has to do to not be caught, fall flat. Only a few really catch on, like the scene where the old lady (the 'other' Natascha) is greeted by flowers and chocolates from a wrong admirer, or some of the scenes with the 'fake' husband and his idea of consummating the marriage.
These flaws pointed out, it isn't very dreadful an experience, and sometimes it's fun seeing Brando and Loren in their personality tug-of-war, plus the cheerful and usually spot-on Chaplin score. It's worth watching once... if not for more than that. It's a sad way to go, but it could've been worse. 5.5/10