Our aim was to locate and describe all existing film prints of Charlie Chaplin’s SHOULDER ARMS (U.S. 1918) in the world within 18 months.

Inspired by sensational discoveries of several historical film prints of Charlie Chaplin’s wartime comedy SHOULDER ARMS (U.S. 1918) in Switzerland, the Swiss film archive and FIAF member Lichtspiel / Kinemathek Bern launched the project MAPPING ARCHIVAL HOLDINGS OF CHAPLIN’S SHOULDER ARMS (MASh) in spring 2021. The collaborative project aimed to locate, identify, and describe all historical prints of SHOULDER ARMS preserved in archives and collections worldwide. There are several versions of the film due to four different camera negatives produced in 1918 (A, B, C, and D negatives). The project focused on prints made before the 1959 CHAPLIN REVUE release of the film. Archives and collectors were encouraged to report their prints/elements by October 2022 (additional contributions are still possible).

Project MASh conducted basic and background research, ensured uniform reporting by the holding institutions, collected and checked the reported information, and continually published the results on this webpage.

After a project duration of 18 months, hundreds of emails, contact with dozens of film archives and private collectors from Cuba to Serbia to Japan (with most feedback coming from North America and Europe), a plethora of film inspections, and a few digitizations by the holding istitutions, we present here, for the first time, detailed information on 50+ historical prints of SHOULDER ARMS. In collaboration with the holding institutions, we unearthed great nitrate prints of multiple releases and versions of the film. Previously, most of these prints were only known to a very small circle of archivists or collectors. And it was not known that these prints are based on four different camera negatives produced over a hundred years ago by one of the major movie stars of the twentieth century.
Project MASh was likely able to locate and identify most of the surviving prints related to the pre-1959 theatrical releases. However, it is of course possible that more prints are waiting to be discovered.
The collected information on archival holdings of Charlie Chaplin’s SHOULDER ARMS will enable and facilitate future research on a wide array of national and international topics, as well as restoration projects. Lichtspiel / Kinemathek Bern does not intend to undertake a restoration project for this title.

Camera Negatives, Releases, and Versions of Charlie Chaplin’s SHOULDER ARMS (1918)

First published online in April 2021; printed in Early Popular Visual Culture, 19/1, in December 2021; updated in October 2022

SHOULDER ARMS is a remarkable movie, in which Charlie Chaplin grapples with the First World War. The slapstick comedy about a clumsy American infantryman is bursting with witty ideas, yet despite the cheerful mood, the film grimly brings to life the horrors of trench warfare while also giving an idea of what the Great War may have meant for the civilian population. The roughly 40-minute film was Chaplin’s second long production for First National. Premiered on October 20, 1918, before peace was concluded, SHOULDER ARMS would become one of the greatest successes of Chaplin’s career.¹

From 1918 onwards, Chaplin shot his silent films with two (or more) cameras and produced several camera negatives per film. This approach allowed the world star to have hundreds of positive prints made for international distribution within a short time, without any loss of quality due to intermediate negatives. In addition, it provided a backup in case of loss of a negative. This has been known in the research community for some time.²

However, we can only trace the production and distribution processes in detail for the first time here thanks to recent research efforts and discoveries: namely, the digitizing, archival indexing, and online publication of Chaplin’s private and business archives – comprising tens of thousands of documents – in 2019,³ as well as the unearthing of additional source materials (including diplomatic documents from Germany’s Federal Foreign Office and Swiss censorship files) and several different prints and versions of Chaplin’s wartime comedy. Encouraged by the spectacular finds of these historical prints, I will describe the different camera negatives of SHOULDER ARMS and trace their uses for various releases and versions of the film. Since this is going to be pretty complicated, an illustrated table at the end summarizes the most important findings. These basic research results, first published in April 2021, laid the foundation for project MASh.

Releases and distributors

Chaplin’s business records show that SHOULDER ARMS was domestically distributed in the U.S. and Canada by Associated First National Pictures for five years beginning in December 1918. The international first-run rights were secured by William Vogel Productions in New York (from First National), also for a period of five years per country, and they were ceded to sub-concessionaires (for example, in France to Pathé). When they expired in the countries that were most essential to the film industry, Pathé Exchange acquired SHOULDER ARMS for a domestic and international re-issue from 1925 to 1930, according to contractual documents. However, the Pathé Exchange release seems to have been postponed and instead lasted from early 1927 to early 1932.⁴

Because SHOULDER ARMS portrays German military personnel and the German Kaiser as nasty war criminals and complete morons, the film was shown only in shortened versions or banned altogether in several countries. Local censors often acted under pressure from German diplomats.⁵

After Pathé’s exploitation rights expired in 1932, screenings of SHOULDER ARMS constituted copyright infringement virtually everywhere. Chaplin’s lawyers did everything they could to prevent screenings and to get hold of illegal 16 mm and 35 mm distribution prints. Chaplin refused requests for distribution and screening rights to SHOULDER ARMS and other films on business grounds, even from non-commercial applicants. Only once does he seem to have made an exception: In the middle of World War II, he allowed the U.S. Army to use SHOULDER ARMS for troop entertainment.⁶

It was not until 1959 that SHOULDER ARMS was regularly screened again, after Chaplin re-released the film along with A DOG’S LIFE and THE PILGRIM as part of THE CHAPLIN REVUE. This 1959 version set to music is considered the official version of the wartime comedy to this day.⁷

Camera negatives and montage logic

Inventory lists, correspondence, and other documents in Chaplin’s business files suggest that he produced four camera negatives in 1918 for SHOULDER ARMS (and likewise for many other silent films).⁸ The so-called A, B, C, and D negatives were created by shooting with two cameras. Accordingly, photos from the film shoot show two cameras positioned directly next to each other.⁹ In addition, several takes were recorded per shot. The alternate takes vary perceptibly because Chaplin improvised a lot while shooting his silent films, often repeating a scene many times with the cameras rolling.¹⁰

As Chaplin was quite a perfectionist, there was plenty of exposed and developed footage to assemble the four original negatives of SHOULDER ARMS. The prints that still exist today, which go back to different negatives, show that Chaplin followed a certain logic when editing the four negatives. Except for a few individual shots, Chaplin applied his montage logic quite systematically: For the A negative, he mostly used footage of the best take/performance from the centrally positioned a-camera; for the B negative, footage of the same take/performance from the b-camera, shifted slightly to the left; for the C negative, footage of the second-best take/performance from the a-camera; and for the D negative, footage of the second-best take/performance from the b-camera.¹¹

Although the camera angles and the framing would differ significantly, and the various takes captured different performances, the four negatives were very similar overall, as their editing was virtually identical, again with the exception of a few minor variations.¹² The most significant editing differences between the surviving prints are not due to the negatives but to subsequent local censorship and image loss owing to mechanical damage and deterioration over time.

The A negative¹³ was used for the first release by First National (1918–1923) and the re-release by Pathé (1927–1932) to create distribution prints for the domestic market (U.S. and Canada). The A negative came into the possession of First National in 1918, was transferred directly from First National to Pathé in Bound Brook, NJ, in 1925 or 1927, and returned to Chaplin in 1932. Incidentally, this rules out a reworking of the film by Chaplin for the Pathé re-release (as has sometimes been suspected, see below). For the Pathé re-release, the film was merely given a slightly modified main title (with Chaplin’s signature) and redesigned intertitles (with identical wording).¹⁴

The B negative went to Vogel Productions in 1918 (possibly via First National) for the international first release. This negative remained with Vogel, and Chaplin was unable to recover it due to an unfortunate wording in the contract, which gave Vogel the right to exploit SHOULDER ARMS in every foreign country for a lease of five years. In other words, as long as this had not yet happened, let’s say, in Finland too, Vogel was not obliged to return the negative.¹⁵

With the B negative unavailable, Pathé also received the backup C negative¹⁶ (in addition to the A negative)  in 1925 or 1927 for its worldwide re-release. Pathé needed this negative to produce distribution prints in Paris for the international market. The C negative returned to Hollywood in 1932 as well and sank into the depths of Chaplin’s studio archive on North La Brea Avenue.¹⁷

In the early 1940s, the A negative was already in poor condition due to intensive use and chemical deterioration. Therefore, in 1943, the 16 mm prints for the U.S. Army were probably made from the C negative, which had surprisingly resurfaced after a lengthy search in the archive.¹⁸

Mysterious revision

Also during the war, Chaplin’s longtime cinematographer Rollie Totheroh worked on the negatives of SHOULDER ARMS and other films, which were then labeled “A negative revised” in the inventories.¹⁹ Chaplin wanted high-quality, technically flawless new negatives of all his First National films for future re-releases. In a 1959 affidavit, Totheroh explained his revision process:

“The negative ‘A’ of a photoplay is the negative made up of the photographic takes of each scene that have been selected for use in making the release prints of the photoplay. The negative ‘B’ and ‘C’ of the same photoplay are made up of other photographic takes of the same scenes and are preserved for protection; that is, for use in case anything happens to the negative ‘A’. I proceeded to inspect the negative ‘A’ of each of the [First National] photoplays and found several scenes in nearly all of them that were in bad condition from shrinkage and deterioration of the film. I also inspected the ‘B’ and ‘C’ negatives that were in better condition […]. I cut out the deteriorated scene from the ‘A’ negative and substituted for it the corresponding scene from the ‘B’ or ‘C’ negative […].”²⁰

Here, Chaplin’s former employee describes in retrospect how he worked on the A, B, and C negatives. Because the actual B negative of SHOULDER ARMS was used for the international first release and, as mentioned, never returned into Chaplin’s custody, Totheroth may in fact have been referring to the A negative and the backup C and D negatives.²¹

There is another problem with the Totheroh affidavit: At least with respect to SHOULDER ARMS, it is also simply not true. To all appearances, Totheroh did not replace parts of the A negative with parts of the C and D negatives. Rather, he declared the existing D negative, which must have been mostly in great condition and into which he inserted just a few snippets of the C negative,²² to be the new revised negative. This is evident from the prints of SHOULDER ARMS discovered to date in archives and private collections. Based on visual cross-comparisons and dozens of individual clues (for example, the edge marks of film stock, distribution company credits, and the distribution history of prints), I was able to assign the historical prints to the A, B, or C negatives with a high degree of probability.²³ It was most likely Chaplin’s copyright considerations that gave rise to the misleading affidavit.²⁴

Eventually, a duplicate copy of the negative revised by Totheroh was used in 1959 for the official release of SHOULDER ARMS as part of THE CHAPLIN REVUE, with some scenes slowed down by stretch printing (since the general projection speed of films after the introduction of talkies was much higher than in the silent era). An introduction and musical accompaniment were also added to the film. All official later releases, such as those for the home cinema market, are essentially based on the Totheroh/REVUE version.²⁵ The revised negative itself, however, had already become unusable by the mid-1950s due to advanced decomposition.²⁶

Conclusion

Some Chaplin scholars and aficionados have claimed that both the Pathé version from 1927 (which circulates in these communities on bootlegged 16 mm prints and DVDs) and the REVUE version were reedited by Chaplin due to second thoughts he might have had about the movie and that they thus differ considerably from the original 1918 first release version.²⁷ These speculations about an artistically outstanding first release version belong to the realm of legend. Based on my research, it seems safe to assume that, firstly, the editing was identical for all negatives (apart from minimal deviations). Second, the circulating domestic Pathé version is identical (except for altered titles) to the original First National first release version (of which a 35 mm print is kept by the Danish Film Institute, though it is hardly accessible).²⁸ Third, Totheroh’s revision of the negative in the 1940s was aimed at producing a negative as technically immaculate as possible, which left no room for artistically motivated changes. And fourth, SHOULDER ARMS was not significantly altered for the REVUE version (aside from stretch printing, scoring, and a few omissions, which were added again later).

It is obvious, however, that most of the shots in the REVUE version (which came primarily from the D negative) are not the “first choice”, otherwise they would have been used for the A and B negatives in 1918. For example, in the scene when the American soldiers at the front receive packages from home, Charlie joyfully dances around the soldier bringing the packages (only to learn that there is nothing for him) in the A and B versions. The C and D versions, by contrast, include a take without the charming dance. In a subsequent scene that is one of the emotional highlights of the film, dejected Charlie reads another soldier’s mail by peeking over his shoulder. Arguably, Chaplin’s performance here is noticeably better and more nuanced in the A and B negatives. And most importantly, the camera angles, and thus the framing of some shots, are clearly subprime in the B and REVUE versions: In both, the trench scene where shell explosions make the helmet on Charlie’s head bounce is shot sideways, disrupting the frontal and central perspective composition. Similarly, the shot of the panicked French woman is less powerful because it is not filmed frontally in the two versions. And in the same shot, the menacing German officer who initiates the woman’s rape is not visible at all due to the unfortunate camera position. Furthermore, in the REVUE version, several individual shots are less tightly framed, thus also keeping the little American soldier at an emotional distance (as with the close-up of Charlie in the tree costume or the cheering at the end).

It is remarkable: Some of the prints of SHOULDER ARMS surviving in archives and collections are, on the one hand, marked by the scars of drastic censorship that physically inscribed themselves in the prints in the form of cuts. On the other hand, these prints endow us with film-historically valuable and fascinating visual variants, with first-choice camera angles and takes.

If film footage somehow “immortalizes” the pictured people, as is often claimed, then their facial features, gestures, and movements captured on film often also seem inanimate and dull in their eternal immutability – dead as it were. Charlie Chaplin, by contrast, appears to us in multiple slight variations: It’s as if the four versions of SHOULDER ARMS offer us an intimate glimpse of him rehearsing. The repetitive yet changing shots come alive, bringing the film star, who died in 1977, to life, as it were.

Table: Camera Negatives and Releases

A negative	B negative	C negative	D negative
used for: First National domestic first release 1918–1923 Pathé domestic re-release 1927–1932	used for: international first release beginning in 1918	used for: Pathé international re-release 1927–1932 U.S. Army release beginning in 1944 (or D negative?)	used for: negative revised by Rollie Totheroh in the mid-1940s (also containing some minor parts of C negative) revised negative used for: REVUE domestic and inter­national release beginning in 1959 later releases
consists predominantly of: a-camera footage (center) best takes/performances	consists predominantly of: b-camera footage (left) best takes/performances	consists predominantly of: a-camera footage (center) second-best takes/performances	consists predominantly of: b-camera footage (left) second-best takes/performances
known prints (First National): Danish Film Institute known prints (Pathé domestic): Dan Kamin (frame enlargements above)	known prints: Cinémathèque suisse (frame enlargements above)	known prints (Pathé international): Lichtspiel / Kinemathek Bern 35 mm (frame enlargements above) Lichtspiel / Kinemathek Bern 16 mm	known prints (REVUE): various (frame enlargements above)

Shoulder Arms © Roy Export S.A.S.

References

¹ David Robinson, Chaplin: His Life and Art, London: Penguin, 2001, 254–257, 801f.; see also Libby Murphy, “Charlot français: Charlie Chaplin, The First World War, and the Construction of a National Hero”, in Contemporary French and Francophone Studies, 14/4 (2010), 421–429.↑

² Francis Bordat, “Les ‘deux’ versions de THE GOLD RUSH (LA RUÉE VERS L’OR)”, in 1895, 89/3 (2019), 80f.; Kevin Brownlow, The Search for Charlie Chaplin, London/Yorkshire/Amsterdam/Shizuoka: UKA Press, 2010, 37, 90; Fred Goodwins and Dan Kamin, Charlie Chaplin’s Red Letter Days: At Work with the Comic Genius, Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2017, 85; Dan Kamin, The Comedy of Charlie Chaplin: Artistry in Motion, Lanham: Scarecrow, 2011, 177–179; David Robinson, Chaplin: His Life and Art, London: Penguin, 2001, 236; Hooman Mehran, “SHOULDER ARMS x 3: Three Wars, Three Editors, Three Versions”, presentation at the 2nd Kyoto Chaplin Conference, March 24, 2007.↑

³ Charlie Chaplin Archive, Fondazione Cineteca di Bologna, http://www.charliechaplinarchive.org.↑

⁴ Draft of agreement between First National Exhibitors Circuit and Charles Chaplin, March 1918, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00313894, CH139; Draft of agreement between Pathé Exchange and and Regent Film Company, September 1, 1925, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00313970, CH146; Synopsis of agreement between Pathé Exchange and Charles Chaplin Film Corporation, [1925], incl. attachment, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00022548, CH15562; “Eltinge Theatre”, in The Bismarck Tribune, February 23, 1927, 4; “Three Men”, in The New York Times, February 28, 1927, n.p.; Advertisement, in The Bioscope (London), September 15, 1927, n.p.; Advertisement, in Le Petite Journal (Paris), September 27, 1927, 4; Picture: SHOULDER ARMS, dates furnished by William Vogel Productions [List], December 1931, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00315441, CH00530; Affidavit of Alfred Reeves, June 15, 1936, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00006073, CH036; Letter from Lois Runser to Arthur Kelly, August 25, 1949, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00017984, CH17345; List of Charles Chaplin Pictures, [1952], Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00022547, CH15561; see also Advertisement, in Le film (Paris), 6/158 (March 23, 1919), n.p.; “Charlie Chaplin dans L’Arme à l’épaule”, in La Cinématographie Française, 2/13 (March 29, 1919), n.p., 1; “Pathé-Programme N° 20”, in La Cinématographie Française, 2/15 (April 12, 1919), 13–24.↑

⁵ Wolff., “Verbot eines deutschfeindlichen Films in der Türkei”, in Neue Zürcher Nachrichten, December 5, 1925, 1f.; Circular letter from Auswärtiges Amt, Berlin, April 16, 1927, Politisches Archiv, Auswärtiges Amt, Berlin, Bern 2701; Letter from Polizeiinspektorat, Basel, to Polizei-Abteilung, Eidgenössisches Justiz- und Polizeidepartement, Bern, October 7, 1931, Staatsarchiv des Kantons Basel-Stadt, Basel, Straf und Polizei F 14.8b; Adrian Gerber, Zwischen Propaganda und Unterhaltung: Das Kino in der Schweiz zur Zeit des Ersten Weltkriegs, Marburg: Schüren, 2017, 384–389, 417–419; Adrian Gerber, “Charlie Chaplin, der Krieg und das Schweizer Schul- und Volkskino: Eine Recherche zu Produktion, Verleih und Aufführung in der Frühzeit des Kinos”, Bern: Lichtspiel / Kinemathek Bern, online publication, 2021; Paul Meier-Kern, Verbrecherschule oder Kulturfaktor?: Kino und Film in Basel 1896–1916, Basel: Helbing & Lichtenhahn, 1993, 126–128; Matthias Uhlmann, Die Filmzensur im Kanton Zürich: Geschichte, Praxis, Entscheide, Zurich: Legissima, 2019, 84; see also Kai Nowak, Projektionen der Moral: Filmskandale in der Weimarer Republik, Göttingen 2015, 231–234; Thomas J. Saunders, “German Diplomacy and the War Film in the 1920s”, in Karel Dibbets and Bert Hogenkamp (eds.), Film and the First World War, Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press 1995, 213–222. I would like to thank Matthias Uhlmann for providing the sources relating to Basel.↑

⁶ Letter from Alfred Reeves to Loyd Wright, March 14, 1935, incl. attachment, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00018879, CH179; Letter from Arthur Schwartz to Alfred Reeves, October 16, 1935, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00018837, CH17887; Letter from Alfred Reeves to Schweizerische Arbeiterbildungszentrale, July 16, 1936, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00018864, CH17914; Letter from Alfred Reeves to Arthur Schwartz, October 27, 1939, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00018629, CH17741; Letter from Frederick Osborn to Alfred Reeves, September 21, 1943, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00019036, CH18057; Letter from Lois Runser to Arthur Kelly, August 25, 1949, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00017984, CH17345; Adrian Gerber, “Charlie Chaplin, der Krieg und das Schweizer Schul- und Volkskino: Eine Recherche zu Produktion, Verleih und Aufführung in der Frühzeit des Kinos”, Bern: Lichtspiel / Kinemathek Bern, online publication, 2021.↑

⁷ For SHOULDER ARMS releases for the modern home cinema market, see Hooman Mehran, “New DVD Releases of Chaplin Films”, in Frank Scheide and Hooman Mehran (eds.), Chaplin’s LIMELIGHT and the Music Hall Tradition, Jefferson: McFarland, 2006, 198–205.↑

⁸ Synopsis of agreement between Pathé Exchange and Charles Chaplin Film Corporation, [1925], incl. attachment [1932], Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00022548, CH15562; Letter from Alfred Reeves to Paul Lazarus, November 22, 1943, incl. attachment, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00019027, CH18048; Letter from Mark Geirrine to Alfred Reeves, December 14, 1943, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00019021, CH18042; Inventory as of April 1, 1946 from list submitted by R. Totheroh, after April 1, 1946, incl. attachment, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00029291, CH23397; Negatives on Charles Chaplin Pictures, January 1951, incl. attachment, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00022559, CH15573; Affidavit of Roland Totheroh, October 13, 1959, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00015139, CH10797; Main Title SHOULDER ARMS, incl. attachment, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00315436, CH00525.↑

⁹ Charles Chaplin with tree costume on the set [Photos], [1918], Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00031058, SA0025.

In the 1920s, Chaplin shot with up to four cameras simultaneously (Mountain set: Chaplin shooting on location [photos], [1923–1925], ECCI00024772, GR015; Back view of 4 cameras shooting crowd at circus entrance [photo], [1925–1927], Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00026075, CIR019).↑

¹⁰ Kevin Brownlow, The Search for Charlie Chaplin, London/Yorkshire/Amsterdam/Shizuoka: UKA Press, 2010, 59, 75, 90, 92, 179, 182f., 187, 192; Dan Kamin, The Comedy of Charlie Chaplin: Artistry in Motion, Lanham: Scarecrow, 2011, 177–179; Fred Goodwins and Dan Kamin, Charlie Chaplin’s Red Letter Days: At Work with the Comic Genius, Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2017, 85; David Robinson, Chaplin: His Life and Art, London: Penguin, 2001, 240, 254, 310f.

The 1983 documentary series UNKNOWN CHAPLIN by Kevin Brownlow and David Gill highlights Chaplin’s creative process and improvisations and presents alternative footage, mostly from earlier Chaplin movies. With regard to SHOULDER ARMS, the series does not show alternate takes of known scenes. However, it presents opening scenes (home life, physical examination) that were never released as part of the war comedy, which seems to have been planned as a longer movie originally.↑

¹¹ Of course, there are some deviations from this editing logic. Technical problems with a take, poor image quality, or other reasons may have forced Chaplin to resort to third- and fourth-best takes during editing. For example, in the tracking shot showing Charlie’s arrival in the trenches, it was apparently not possible to work with two cameras simultaneously. Consequently, there are four different takes; in two of them, Charlie enters the frame from the left at the end of the trench, in the other two he walks along the trench to its end. Furthermore, the close-up of the mousetrap consists of different takes in all four negatives. And the letter scene is not the same take in the C and D negatives.

For the attribution of the known prints to the negatives, see note 23 below.↑

¹² For example, after the intertitle “Put those feet in”, only the C negative has a medium shot of the drill sergeant and Charlie, as well as an intriguing close-up of Charlie’s marching feet.↑

¹³ The length of the A negative was 921 meters (3023 feet).↑

¹⁴ First National Release and Pathé Re-issue [film strips], [1918/1925], Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00315451, CH025; Synopsis of agreement between Pathé Exchange and Charles Chaplin Film Corporation, [1925], incl. attachment [1932], Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00022548, CH15562; Picture: SHOULDER ARMS, dates furnished by William Vogel Productions [List], December 1931, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00315441, CH00530; Affidavit of Alfred Reeves, June 15, 1936, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00006073, CH036; List of Charles Chaplin Pictures, [1952], Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00022547, CH15561; see also Eugene Conte, Music Cue Shoulder arms, [1927], George Eastman Museum, Rochester, 1995.2324.0001; Cutting continuity on SHOULDER ARMS, August 26, 1938, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00315434, CH02548; Jürg Stenzl, Charlie Chaplin: Die Musik zu seinen Stummfilmen, München: Edition text + kritik 2020. 93–107.↑

¹⁵ Picture: SHOULDER ARMS, dates furnished by William Vogel Productions [List], December 1931, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00315441, CH00530; Letter from Alfred Reeves to Arthur Schwartz, October 27, 1939, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00018629, CH17741; Letter from Alfred Reeves to Loyd Wright, March 6, 1943, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00006137, CH040; Letter from Lois Runser to Arthur Kelly, August 25, 1949, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00017984, CH17345; Negatives on Charles Chaplin Pictures, January 1951, incl. attachment, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00022559, CH15573; see also Jürg Stenzl, Charlie Chaplin: Die Musik zu seinen Stummfilmen, München: Edition text + kritik 2020. 55–58.↑

¹⁶ The length of the C negative was 787 meters (2581 feet). This negative contained only flash titles, which partly explains the shorter length.↑

¹⁷ Synopsis of agreement between Pathé Exchange and Charles Chaplin Film Corporation, [1925], incl. attachment [1932], Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00022548, CH15562; Letter from Alfred Reeves to Paul Lazarus, November 16, 1943, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00019030, CH180; Inventory as of April 1, 1946 from list submitted by R. Totheroh, after April 1, 1946, incl. attachment, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00029291, CH23397; Affidavit of Roland Totheroh, October 13, 1959, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00015139, CH10797.↑

¹⁸ In mid-November 1943, Chaplin’s studio head Alfred Reeves commissioned Pathé Laboratories in Hollywood to examine and prepare the discovered C negative to make a duplicating lavender print for the U.S. Army. The situation here, however, is not clear-cut. In mid-December, a letter from Pathé mentions “revised C & D version negatives”, from which two lavender positives were struck. One of the lavenders went to the Army. Thus, on the one hand, it is possible that instead of the C negative, the D negative was used for the Army. On the other hand, there is the question of what exactly the revision of the C and D negatives was all about. Was it just a technical preparation of the negatives (for example, of the intertitles and of the reels), or was actual editing work done on the movie? I don’t think the latter was the case, because such extensive work would have had to be done by – or in close consultation with – Chaplin’s staff. There is no evidence in the business records of any such exchange or of any temporary return of the negatives from Pathé to Chaplin’s studio (Letter from Alfred Reeves to Paul Lazarus, October 15, 1943, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00019031, CH180; Letter from Alfred Reeves to Paul Lazarus, November 16, 1943, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00019030, CH180; Letter from Alfred Reeves to Paul Lazarus, November 22, 1943, incl. attachment, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00019027, CH18048; Letter from Mark Geirrine to Alfred Reeves, December 14, 1943, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00019021, CH18042; Inventory as of April 1, 1946 from list submitted by R. Totheroh, after April 1, 1946, incl. attachment, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00029291, CH23397; Main Title SHOULDER ARMS, incl. attachment, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00315436, CH00525).↑

¹⁹ Inventory as of April 1, 1946 from list submitted by R. Totheroh, after April 1, 1946, incl. attachment, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00029291, CH23397; see also Negatives on Charles Chaplin Pictures, January 1951, incl. attachment, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00022559, CH15573.

In my opinion, it is unlikely that the technical revision of the C and D negatives for the Army release at the end of 1943 was the same revision that Totheroh subsequently undertook for SHOULDER ARMS and other Chaplin movies, and from which the “definitive negatives” of Chaplin’s First National films emerged. David Robinson, in contrast, believes that Totheroh first set about “revising and restoring a perfect new negative [of SHOULDER ARMS for the Army], using plentiful negative out-takes that had been stored”. When Chaplin saw this version in January 1944, he ordered Totheroh to produce new negatives for the other First Nationals during 1944. These new versions were then used for later re-issues (David Robinson, Chaplin: His Life and Art, London: Penguin, 2001, 564f.; see also Fred Goodwins and Dan Kamin, Charlie Chaplin’s Red Letter Days: At Work with the Comic Genius, Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2017, 85; Dan Kamin, The Comedy of Charlie Chaplin: Artistry in Motion, Lanham: Scarecrow, 2011, 177–179; Post by David Shepard, October 3, 1998, on alt.movies.chaplin; Post by Jeffrey Vance, February 2, 2003, on alt.movies.silent).↑

²⁰ Affidavit of Roland Totheroh, October 13, 1959, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00015139, CH10797.↑

²¹ Negatives on Charles Chaplin Pictures, January 1951, incl. attachment, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00022559, CH15573.↑

²² It is theoretically possible that the revised negative also contains a few parts of the A negative. However, I have not noticed any such shots so far.↑

²³ Since the attribution to the original negatives is based on only a handful of known prints, it is provisional in nature until project MASh is completed.

The print from the Danish Film Institute descends from A negative (First National domestic first release 1918–1923): Print has official main title (Chaplin signing his name); print has English-language intertitles with First National logo; print has Kodak 1918 edge marks; images (angles and takes) are (as far as is known) identical to the print from Dan Kamin (see arguments there).

The print from Dan Kamin descends from A negative (Pathé domestic re-release 1927–1932): Print does not have official main title; print has English-language intertitles without logo; print has a Pathé end title; action is identical to 1938 cutting continuity (Cutting continuity on SHOULDER ARMS, August 26, 1938, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00315434, CH02548); images (angles and takes) are identical to postcard (Charlie Chaplin Card, [1918], Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00030902, SA0013); images with superior camera angles/perspectives (mostly center); superior takes/performances; images (angles and takes) are (as far as is known) identical to the print from the Danish Film Institute; takes (not angles) are mostly the same as in the print from Cinémathèque suisse.

The print from Cinémathèque suisse descends from B negative (used for the international first release beginning in 1918), with some minor parts from A negative: Print has French- and German-language intertitles with Etna-Film logo; print has Kodak 1920 edge marks; Geneva-based Woldemar Schultz, the western Swiss distribution partner of Etna-Film Co. A.-G. in Lucerne for the official Swiss Pathé re-release of SHOULDER ARMS starting in July 1927, was verifiably in possession of a print of the film in previous years (Letter from Deutsches Generalkonsulat, Zurich, to Auswärtiges Amt, Berlin, April 23, 1927, Politisches Archiv, Auswärtiges Amt, Berlin, Bern 2701; see also Letter from Deutsches Konsulat, Geneva, to Deutsche Gesandtschaft, Bern, June 18, 1928, Politisches Archiv, Auswärtiges Amt, Berlin, Bern 2702; Letter from Etna-Film Co. A.-G., Lucerne, to Deutscher Hilfsverein, Lucerne, June 23, 1928, Politisches Archiv, Auswärtiges Amt, Berlin, Bern 2702); action is identical to cutting continuity from 1938; images with inferior camera angles (mostly left); superior takes; takes (not angles) are mostly the same as in the prints from the Danish Film Institute and Dan Kamin; exceptions for some minor parts (not tinted): Images (angles and takes) are identical to prints from the Danish Film Institute and Dan Kamin; no images (angles and takes) are identical to REVUE version.

The prints from Lichtspiel / Kinemathek Bern (35 mm and 16 mm) descend from C negative (used for Pathé international re-release 1927–1932): Images (angles and takes) from the 35 mm and 16 mm Lichtspiel prints are identical; both prints descend from the same source (probably the dupe negative of an earlier distribution print); prints have French- and German-language intertitles without logo; 35 mm print has an end title with distribution company credit: Sauty Genève; 35 mm print has Kodak 1929/1930 edge marks; Uty-Films S.A. in Geneva (Charles-Émile Sauty) distributed the print under the title IM OSTEN WAS NEUES beginning in 1931 (shortly before the end of the official Pathé re-release) (Letter from Polizeiinspektorat, Basel, to Polizei-Abteilung, Eidgenössisches Justiz- und Polizeidepartement, Bern, September 16, 1931, Staatsarchiv des Kantons Basel-Stadt, Basel, Straf und Polizei F 14.8b; Letter from Walter Gould to Alfred Reeves, April 3, 1936, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00006045, CH031; Paul Meier-Kern, Verbrecherschule oder Kulturfaktor?: Kino und Film in Basel 1896–1916, Basel: Helbing & Lichtenhahn, 1993, 128); one intertitle bears the wording “IM OSTEN WAS NEUES!”; action is not identical to cutting continuity from 1938; images with superior camera angles (mostly center); takes (not angles) are mostly the same as in REVUE version; a few images (angles and takes) are identical to REVUE version (for example, some of the shots before the soldiers go over the top).

The REVUE version (REVUE domestic and international release beginning in 1959) descends from the revised negative containing mostly D negative and some minor parts of C negative: Action is not identical to cutting continuity from 1938; images with inferior camera angles (mostly left); takes (not angles) are mostly the same as in prints from Lichtspiel, a few images (angles and takes) are identical to prints from Lichtspiel; no images (angles and takes) are identical to print from Cinémathèque suisse.

My attribution also corresponds with Kevin Brownlow’s notion of “Chaplin’s total concentration on performance to the exclusion of all else”, such as camera setup (Kevin Brownlow, The Search for Charlie Chaplin, London/Yorkshire/Amsterdam/Shizuoka: UKA Press, 2010, 91f., 138, 189). For Chaplin it was only natural in 1918 to use the B negative with superior performances for the foreign release and the C negative with superior camera angles as a backup copy.↑

²⁴ Although Chaplin must have known about Totheroh’s revision of SHOULDER ARMS and the other First Nationals toward the end of World War II, he does not seem to have been very involved in the revision process and apparently forgot about it later on (Dan Kamin, The Comedy of Charlie Chaplin: Artistry in Motion, Lanham: Scarecrow, 2011, 177; Post by David Shepard, October 3, 1998, on alt.movies.chaplin; Post by Jeffrey Vance, February 2, 2003, on alt.movies.silent; Hooman Mehran, “SHOULDER ARMS x 3: Three Wars, Three Editors, Three Versions”, presentation at the 2nd Kyoto Chaplin Conference, March 24, 2007). When Chaplin fully realized in 1959 that the original negatives were no longer available, it was a shock to him, which led to a serious conflict with Totheroh. Rachel Ford, Chaplin’s business manager, noted in a later memo: “When Mr. Chaplin was working on THE CHAPLIN REVUE he noticed that the print he was using of A DOG’S LIFE was not made entirely from neg A – Terrific uproar.” The same applied to SHOULDER ARMS. Chaplin’s indignation and disappointment were probably not primarily due to artistic reasons but rather to copyright issues. The memo continues: “explanation was forthcoming from Totheroh who furnished affidavit (helpful repirating) as we could be accused of not having true negative” (THE CHAPLIN REVUE, [1974?], Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00020272, CH205).

In the years before and after the release of THE CHAPLIN REVUE, Chaplin was confronted with the fact that A DOG’S LIFE, THE GOLD RUSH, SHOULDER ARMS, and other films of his were distributed by feisty film freebooter Raymond Rohauer, among others, without Chaplin’s consent. The rogue distributors claimed to have different negative versions than the ones copyrighted by Chaplin. In court, Chaplin does not seem to have prevailed in all cases. (Letter from Richard Goldwater to Rachel Ford, October 28, 1957, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00029337, CH234; Raymond Rohauer vs Robert Fischer, July 21, 1959, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00018603, CH177; “Defense of Chaplin Film Piracy”, in Variety, October 25, 1961, 5; United States of America vs Raymond Rohauer, July 2, 1962, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00018600, CH177; Francis Bordat, “Les ‘deux’ versions de THE GOLD RUSH (LA RUÉE VERS L’OR)”, in 1895, 89/3 (2019), 82f., 99–107; Kevin Brownlow, The Search for Charlie Chaplin, London/Yorkshire/Amsterdam/Shizuoka: UKA Press, 2010, 17, 177f.; Hooman Mehran, “New DVD Releases of Chaplin Films”, in Frank Scheide and Hooman Mehran (eds.), Chaplin’s LIMELIGHT and the Music Hall Tradition, Jefferson: McFarland 2006, 198).

Totheroh’s affidavit originated in this context, where he was apparently given instructions on how to express himself (Letter from Rachel Ford to Richard Goldwater, October 1, 1959, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00005369, CH038; Letter from Richard Goldwater to Roland Totheroh, November 6, 1959, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00005407, CH038; Letter from Richard Goldwater to Roland Totheroh, November 7, 1959, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00005406, CH038; Letter from Richard Goldwater to Roland Totheroh, November 10, 1959, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00005372, CH038). The intention was to give the impression that all circulating versions of SHOULDER ARMS were essentially based on the A negative and thus largely identical. That is why the affidavit also conceals the existence of the international first release version (the true B negative). Other pronouncements by Chaplin’s people also emphasize that only “some small parts of negative ‘A’ […] were replaced” (Sworn declaration, 1959, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00005367, CH038). Numerous documents in the Charlie Chaplin Archive pertaining to this issue remain unavailable to the public to this day.↑

²⁵ THE PILGRIM, A DOG’S LIFE, THE KID, SHOULDER ARMS scenes and speeds, October 10, 1958, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00031018, CH235; THE CHAPLIN REVUE action continuity script, September 1959, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00004598, CH035; THE CHAPLIN REVUE Music Cuesheet, 1959, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00020430, CH207; THE CHAPLIN REVUE music breakdown, 1972 [?], Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00315399, CH005; Hooman Mehran, “New DVD Releases of Chaplin Films”, in Frank Scheide and Hooman Mehran (eds.), Chaplin’s LIMELIGHT and the Music Hall Tradition, Jefferson: McFarland 2006, 198–201; see also Jürg Stenzl, Charlie Chaplin: Die Musik zu seinen Stummfilmen, München: Edition text + kritik 2020. 107–111.

For the theatrical release of THE CHAPLIN REVUE in 1959, some shots and parts of shots were cut out of SHOULDER ARMS. The “three on a match” superstition just before the soldiers go over the top, the complete “Poor France” sequence, some shots of the tree chase and the subsequent drainpipe sequence, as well as parts of the Kaiser visiting the front, including Charlie trying to speak German, are missing, among other things (see also Dan Kamin, Charlie Chaplin’s One-Man Show, Metuchen: Scarecrow, 1984, 98; Hooman Mehran, “SHOULDER ARMS x 3: Three Wars, Three Editors, Three Versions”, presentation at the 2nd Kyoto Chaplin Conference, March 24, 2007). The distributor United Artists (as well as Rachel Ford) had strongly advised Chaplin to make cuts because it would increase the number of screenings possible per movie theatre and day (Letter from Rachel Ford to Charles Chaplin, January 26, 1959, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00020492, CH207). Later releases, often also called REVUE versions, included the omitted parts again. This is true of David Shepard’s restorations (no stretch printing) and other DVD editions.↑

²⁶ Letter from H. G. Barker to Rachel Ford, October 16, 1957, incl. attachment, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00029212, CH230; Letter from H. G. Barker to Rachel Ford, May 31, 1963, incl. attachment, Charlie Chaplin Archive, ECCI00029202, CH230.↑

²⁷ One representative example of the claims about allegedly significant version differences and of the exaggerated glorification of the First National version is the following online statement by renowned American film preservationist David Shepard: “Personally (please don’t shoot), having been familiar with [SHOULDER ARMS] only from [the Pathé and REVUE] versions, I never understood its exalted reputation. Two summers ago in Denmark, I saw a true original 1918 English-titled print of this picture, easily identified by the First National main and end titles […]. A few parts were chopped up […] but it was generally in very good shape and the picture quality was stunning. Well, I fell on the floor! It was a completely different picture! Incredibly funny, full of fresh (to me) little bits, and absolutely worthy of the superlatives heaped on this movie during its early years. I knew at that moment that I had never seen SHOULDER ARMS before.” (Post by David Shepard, October 3, 1998, on alt.movies.chaplin). See also Fred Goodwins and Dan Kamin, Charlie Chaplin’s Red Letter Days: At Work with the Comic Genius, Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2017, 85, 311f.↑

²⁸ As mentioned above, Chaplin had no direct access to the A negative between 1918 and 1932, which would have been a requirement for rearranging the film for the 1927 Pathé re-release. I have not yet been able to verify the hypothesis that the domestic Pathé version is identical to the First National version through direct visual comparison of the two versions, as I have only had access to a few frame enlargements of the Danish First National print to date.↑

The final report will be released in 2023.

A Negative

The following discovered prints/elements are based on the A negative used for the First National domestic first release of 1918–1923 and the Pathé domestic re-release of 1927–1932.

B Negative

The following discovered prints/elements are based on the B negative used for the international first release beginning in 1918.

C Negative

The following discovered prints/elements are based on the C negative mainly used for the Pathé international re-release of 1927–1932.

D Negative

The following discovered prints/elements are based on the D negative used for the CHAPLIN REVUE domestic and international release beginning in 1959, as well as later releases. This list is not exhaustive, as project MASh focuses on pre-1959 releases.

Negative Non-Specified

The following discovered prints/elements could be based on the A, B, C, or D negative.

No Holdings

According to their own statements, the following archives do not own any prints/elements of SHOULDER ARMS related to the pre-1959 theatrical releases.

Cinemateca de Cuba

Cinemateca Portuguesa

Cohen Media Group / Rohauer Collection (New York)

Imperial War Museum (London)

National Film Archive of Japan

National Film Institute Hungary

Rockefeller Foundation (New York)

Article “Camera Negatives, Releases, and Versions of Charlie Chaplin’s SHOULDER ARMS (1918)” by Adrian Gerber, in Early Popular Visual Culture, 19/1 (2021), 38–51, published online December 26, 2021: link

Article “Charlie Chaplin, der Krieg und das Schweizer Schul- und Volkskino” by Adrian Gerber (on the 16 mm Lichtspiel print of SHOULDER ARMS, in German), on Kinogeschite(n) by Lichtspiel / Kinemathek Bern, published online February 27, 2021: link

Interview with Brigitte Paulowitz about project MASh, on NitrateVille Radio, published online May 4, 2021: link

Cutting continuity on SHOULDER ARMS: link

Eastman Kodak Date Code Charts / Guide to identifying year of manufacture for Kodak film stock: link

Excel form to report a print/element: download

Project MASh is hosted by the Swiss film archive Lichtspiel / Kinemathek Bern, https://lichtspiel.ch/en, member of Fédération Internationale des Archives du Film (FIAF) and of Association des Cinémathèques Européennes (ACE).

Lichtspiel / Kinemathek Bern
Sandrainstrasse 3
CH-3007 Berne
Switzerland

Contact: adrian.gerber@gmx.net

Project leader: Dr. Adrian Gerber, archivist and film historian

Translation: Dr. Susie Trenka

Partners

The Chaplin Office, Paris (Kate Guyonvarch)

On behalf of the Chaplin rightsholding companies and the Chaplin family, the Chaplin Office endorses project MASh.

Cineteca di Bologna (Cecilia Cenciarelli)

Department of Film Studies, University of Zurich (Daniel Wiegand)

Advisory Board

Serge Bromberg, founder and CEO of Lobster Films, Paris

Cecilia Cenciarelli, head of Chaplin Project, Cineteca di Bologna

Thomas Christensen, curator, Danish Film Institute, Copenhagen

Roland Cosandey, film historian, Vevey

Caroline Fournier, head of film department, Cinémathèque suisse, Lausanne

Dr. Wolfgang Fuhrmann, film scholar, Bogotà

Dan Kamin, author, Chaplin specialist, mime and theatre artist, Mt. Lebanon

Brigitte Paulowitz, head of film collections, Lichtspiel / Kinemathek Bern

David Robinson, author and Chaplin specialist, Bath

Dr. Matthias Uhlmann, film historian and censorship specialist, Zurich

Prof. Dr. Daniel Wiegand, film scholar, University of Zurich

Partners

The Chaplin Office, Paris (Kate Guyonvarch)

On behalf of the Chaplin rightsholding companies and the Chaplin family, the Chaplin Office endorses project MASh.

Cineteca di Bologna (Cecilia Cenciarelli)

Department of Film Studies, University of Zurich (Daniel Wiegand)

Advisory Board

Serge Bromberg, founder and CEO of Lobster Films, Paris

Cecilia Cenciarelli, head of Chaplin Project, Cineteca di Bologna

Thomas Christensen, curator, Danish Film Institute, Copenhagen

Roland Cosandey, film historian, Vevey

Caroline Fournier, head of film department, Cinémathèque suisse, Lausanne

Dr. Wolfgang Fuhrmann, film scholar, Bogotà

Dan Kamin, author, Chaplin specialist, mime and theatre artist, Mt. Lebanon

Brigitte Paulowitz, head of film collections, Lichtspiel / Kinemathek Bern

David Robinson, author and Chaplin specialist, Bath

Dr. Matthias Uhlmann, film historian and censorship specialist, Zurich

Prof. Dr. Daniel Wiegand, film scholar, University of Zurich

Cover image

Images in table

Information about prints (in forms)

Rest of text on website

Project MASh is immensely grateful to its partners and advisory board as well as to the many archives and collectors who checked their catalogues and vaults and inspected and reported their SHOULDER ARMS prints.

Our special thanks go to Christopher Bird, Serge Bromberg, Tino Buchs, Cecilia Cenciarelli, Thomas Christensen, Roland Cosandey, Stefan Drößler, Peter Fasnacht, Caroline Fournier, Barbara Flückiger, João Antonio Franz, Wolfgang Fuhrmann, Anita Gertiser, Kate Guyonvarch, Dan Kamin, David Landolf, Bruce Lawton, Sophia Lorent, Hooman Mehran, Ana-Maria Nascinschi, Brigitte Paulowitz, T. R., David Robinson, Ulrich Rüdel, Gilbert Stinner, David Totheroh, Susie Trenka, Margrit Tröhler, Matthias Uhlmann, Andy Ulrich, Daniel Wiegand, Niklaus Wostry, and David Wyatt.

The active reporting phase of project MASh was successfully completed in October 2022. However, the reporting of prints is still possible and appreciated.

If you represent a film archive or if you are a collector, we hope you will check your catalogues and vaults and share information about your SHOULDER ARMS print or print elements with us.

To report a film print or element, please download and use this empty Excel form (the file contains a separate worksheet as a sample of a completed entry and as guidance for filling out the form). Please use one form for each print and fill in as many fields as possible.

Please send the completed forms to adrian.gerber@gmx.net.

If available, frame enlargements can be sent via https://wetransfer.com. These images will not be published without the institution’s and the rights holder’s approval.