|
Post by wmcclain on May 20, 2020 11:50:27 GMT
The Prisoner of Zenda (1937), directed by John Cromwell. I feel a Ronald Colman marathon coming on. In my earliest movie memories he is a mythic figure from the old films, seemingly in a category by himself: distinguished, witty, but with touches of pain and sadness. The silent film actor who became one of the great voices of the century. This is the now familiar story of the distant relation and look-alike to a monarch who must become king for a day -- but who finds himself in the role for quite a bit longer. It's a good-looking 1930s action picture, although the swashbuckling doesn't get into gear until the last segment. Terrifically romantic. The heroes are brave and noble, the villains brave and dastardly. All crave the struggle, the chance to fight and triumph. Many familiar faces: - Ronald Colman in the dual lead roles.
- Madeleine Carroll, last seen in The 39 Steps (1935), the princess who discovers the imposter is a better king -- and a better man -- than the original.
- C. Aubrey Smith, born 1863, massively featured and captain of the Hollywood cricket team. He played the dual leads on stage in the 1890s when the book was new.
- Raymond Massey is the arch-villain, although there isn't much for him to do other than glower.
- Mary Astor, who betrays for love.
- David Niven, young but stalwart.
- Douglas Fairbanks Jr, deliciously evil as our hero's nemesis. He wanted the lead badly, but C. Aubrey Smith told him: "I've played every part in this story except Flavia, and no one's career was ever harmed by playing Rupert of Hentzau". (Much as I revere James Mason, his version in the 1952 remake just can't compare).
Alfred Newman score and James Wong Howe photography.
|
|
|
Post by wmcclain on May 20, 2020 11:50:51 GMT
The Prisoner of Zenda (1952), directed by Richard Thorpe. This remake of The Prisoner of Zenda (1937) has large boots to fill. Even with Technicolor and stars I revere -- Deborah Kerr and James Mason -- it can't keep up with the original. Not bad, but not great. If they'd waited another couple of years it might have been a widescreen spectacle. I have nothing against Stewart Granger and they make good use of his swashbuckling prowess to give an extended sword-fighting sequence at the climax, but there is just no substitute for Ronald Colman. His wry intelligence and sad soulful depth: that doesn't come along in every generation. They use the same Alfred Newman score and the same shooting script as the original and the camera angles and scene setups are often very similar. Which do you like better: Deborah Kerr has such a strong personality that it is hard to believe her when she is overwhelmed by love or passion. James Mason's haircut is distracting; it looks like the Prussian style from The Desert Fox: The Story of Rommel (1951). He can play the charming psycho. It is startling to see Jane Greer in costume; we are used to her modern look in Out of the Past (1947) and The Big Steal (1949). Available on DVD, both films on one disc.
|
|
|
Post by marshamae on May 20, 2020 14:04:20 GMT
Your side by sides are exactly how I process these two films. 1937 - love the cast 1952 love the saturated glowing color
Madeleine Carroll - best in the snippy dialogue scenes Deborah Kerr - best in the last scene I always cry when she says I was born fir those cares and duties
Ronald Colman inhabits the rôle. Stewart Granger though very good, is just acting it.
As Col Zax C Aubrey Smith takes all the points. I doubt anyone can beat him at this particular type of role. Same for Mary Aster.
Mason gives a good performance, always good as a snarky villain. But Fairbanks ‘ snide smart Alec is just as good and ,combined with his youth and physical agility , is far and away the better Rupert. I wish that Colman had been a better swordsman. Fairbanks was excellent( who is his daddy again? ) but Colman could only manage the 1-2-3 slash type of movie sword fight. It was still exciting .
Finally , Raymond Massey might not have had much to do as Michael, but Robert Douglass( who?) was invisible and unmemorable. It would have been better to cast James Mason as Michael and a younger actor as Rupert . Richard Burton and Richard Todd were around and would have been great though the part might have been too small to tempt them .
Fr9m all this you can see that I have watched both films and enjoy them both.
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on May 20, 2020 14:22:31 GMT
I much prefer the 1952 remake with Stewart Granger. The ‘37 version is okay.
|
|
|
Post by petrolino on May 20, 2020 15:52:20 GMT
I really like John Cromwell's 1937 film.
|
|
|
Post by teleadm on May 22, 2020 16:45:56 GMT
Since state TV in Sweden had a contract with MGM, we got to see the 1952 version very often. Sadly not seen the Ronald Colman version as of yet. Unfortunatly I've seen the Peter Sellers version, and even payed for tickets, since it was a date (that turned out well).
|
|
|
Post by Doghouse6 on May 22, 2020 20:01:52 GMT
Don't miss director Rex Ingram's rollicking 1922 version. It may be difficult to imagine Lewis Stone (mild mannered old Judge Hardy himself) as the dashing romantic hero, and indeed, he's no Ronald Colman or even Stewart Granger; he nevertheless pulls it off well enough. But the big attraction here is Ramon Novarro as Rupert of Hentzau, miles from his subsequent matinee idol image, in a star-making performance of leering, shifty-eyed, mustache-twirling villainy. And relishing every moment of it.
|
|