A very interesting question and one I thought of myself. Hearst was almost unbelievably wealthy and powerful with the money and influence to buy anything he wanted. If he had had any premeditated ideas about getting rid of Chaplin, a few thousand dollars paid to a couple of fiercely loyal employees could have had Charlie tossed in the Pacific in the middle of the night. With no witnesses the assumption would be that Charlie had a little too much to drink and fell overboard. By the time he washed up on a beach somewhere, there wouldn't be much left.
If Hearst really had shot Chaplin, as he had intended, he would have had a lot of explaining to do since everyone knew about Charlie and Marion. All of his money and influence might not have bought him out of that one. My guess is that he would have had Chaplin's body tossed overboard and tried to convince Marion to keep her mouth shut for the sake of her career.
Why did Hearst invite Chaplin to the party in the first place??? Marion Davies tells Chaplin that it was to "keep an eye on both of them." Doesn't make sense.
reply
share
Evil-Dead-Girl
18 years ago
"My guess is that he would have had Chaplin's body tossed overboard and tried to convince Marion to keep her mouth shut for the sake of her career."
Nice. You would have been a valuable asset to Mr. Hearst. He would have paid good money to someone with those types of ideas, I'm sure.
As far as why Hearst invited Chaplin to the party to "keep an eye on both of them". The only way I can make sense of it is that he wanted to observe the way they acted towards one another, see if there were any visible signs of attraction. Possibly catch them doing something incriminating. Just a thought.
reply
share
LilDevotchka6271
17 years ago
We wouldn't be where we are in movies, like directing and acting if he did. He inspired most of it.
Things would be different.
reply
share