The Great Dictator who view the barber as different include Stephen Weissman, whose book "Chaplin: A Life" speaks of Chaplin "abandoning traditional pantomime technique and his little tramp character". DVD reviewer Mark Bourne asserts Chaplin's stated position: "Granted, the barber bears more than a passing resemblance to the Tramp, even affecting the familiar bowler hat and cane. But Chaplin was clear that the barber is not the Tramp and "The Great Dictator" is not a Tramp movie." "The Scarecrow Movie Guide" also views the barber as different. Annette Insdorf, in her book "Indelible Shadows: Film and the Holocaust" (2003), writes that "There was
The Great Dictator Chaplin himself brought up his own brother's "King, Queen, Joker" of the silent era. The case, "Bercovici v. Chaplin", was settled, with Chaplin paying Konrad Bercovici $95,000. Bercovici claimed that he had created ideas such as Chaplin playing a dictator and a dance with a globe, and that Chaplin had discussed his five-page outline for a screenplay with him for several hours. But Chaplin insisted in his autobiography that he had been the sole writer of the movie's script. He agreed to a settlement, because of his "unpopularity in the States at that moment and being under such court pressure,