Fade-Out for Edna

'Sea Gulls' may have been intended by Chaplin as a starring vehicle for Edna Purviance, more than as an opportunity for Sternberg to direct again. Chaplin was no longer very interested in using her in his own comedies, but he seems to have wanted her to continue her acting career.

'Movie Weekly' was not one of the more scholarly film journals in the 1920s, but here's an item from its 3/1/24 issue that may be of some interest. Similar announcements were made elsewhere about a new dramatic career for her. (Note: 'Dines' refers to the playboy Courtland Dines, who was shot during a party at Edna's house a year or two earlier.)

EDNA PURVIANCE NOT TO BE CHARLIE'S LEADING WOMAN

'It looks as though Edna Purviance were not to be Charlie Chaplin's leading lady in his new picture, after all. It is not, says Charlie, because of Miss Purviance's presence in the house when Dines was shot that she is not to be in his picture, but because he had about made up his mind in any event to use a brunette as a new type. However, he may yet decide to use his former leading woman.

'There is another thing: Miss Purviance is supposed to be starred in her own pictures, and as Charlie's picture will take some six months to make, it is possible she may wish to make another feature before he finishes the current one.

'Charlie's picture will be a burlesque of the stories of the 'great Northwest, where men are men.' The picture will be a comedy from start to finish, and it is expected that Charlie's cuttings-up in driving a dog-team and on snow-shoes, will be very funny.'

Shush wrote;

Yes, the purpose was to give Edna a boost, and not to help Sternberg principally. It appears that it did not do the former and therefore he decided to reverse himself on the latter.

The 'astute Florey' begs to differ with you about Edna. If you believe him you must have the cause and effect reversed. Florey specifically commented on the high quality of Edna's work, so if you believe him about that, it's pretty difficult to justify your opinion that Chaplin 'decided to reverse himself on' helping Sternberg *because* it wouldn't have boosted Edna's career. Or is that too logical?

I know of statements about wanting to use A Woman of Paris to launch a dramatic career for Edna but am unaware of any such pronouncements related to A Woman of the Sea. On what do you base your assertion that 'the purpose was to give Edna a boost'? It may well be true, I'm just wondering why you'd make such a definitive declarative statement without sharing the

Perhaps Chaplin didn't agree with Florey.

Why do you think he commissioned a feature film starring a fading Edna? As an expensive home movie?