They always put "The Earrings of Madame de" on the Best lists, and rank it as more important than this, but I like "Le Plaisir" better. The stories are all affecting and ironic and memorable, and Ophuls' virtuosity with the moving camera is as amazing as ever.
--------------
***You must be old and wrinkled to have that type of reaction. - Liana***
[deleted]
I'm one of those who think that Martine Carol's lack of distinction is a plus, not a minus, for Lola Montes, so I tend to rank that highest. A lot of people bitterly disagree with me, and I respect their point of view.
I think there's a prejudice against anthology films, but there's no unevenness to Le Plaisir. The whole thing is terrific.
I'm one of those who think that Martine Carol's lack of distinction is a plus, not a minus, for Lola Montes, so I tend to rank that highest. A lot of people bitterly disagree with me, and I respect their point of view.
Well I don't. Simply refusing to seriously consider a work of staggering complexity like Lola Montes because the actress wasn't classy enough is snobbish elitism and one of Ophuls' many objects of scorn in his final film.
"Ça va by me, madame...Ça va by me!" - The Red Shoes
I remember being really surprised at the criticism of Martine Carol's performance in Lola Montes, I thought her coolness made her much more unpredictable, like a Hitchcock Brunette or Kim Novak. She was beautiful enough to have been a courtesan and muse (at least to me), and she does beautifully convey the innocence of young Lola as a girl, still optimistic of love, the playful unpredictability of the muse, and the worn worldliness of a woman selling her life for the price of admission. I really liked her performance and remember being very moved by it when I saw it on the big screen.
"GOD--WAS--WRONG!"--James Mason, Bigger Than Life
Well the thing with modern audiences is that they don't really know anything about the context in which Lola Montes was released to the public...which is good as they can just judge the film itself. Andrew Sarris best described the effect of the film as, being like Welles doing a Betty Grable picture but with all the distancing effects and technical wizardry of Citizen Kane.
Lola Montes was a commercial outing for Ophuls, the colour and CinemaScope came from the producers not him and Martine Carol came with the project naturally. He eventually bended the film into making a deeply personal film and a tour de force in cinema unlike anything that came before but this naturally upset everyone. The public came to the film expecting a lurid campy melodrama while Ophuls in effect made a film about them and the snobs wanted high art instead of a film that's cold and challenging. So it didn't satisfy anyone.
I personally see Martine Carol as being fine for the film and it's role. Actually more effective in that role than a stronger actress like Danielle Darrieux(who was Madame de...) where her character would be more obviously sympathetic. Lola Montes is not really a very glamarous woman but someone who pretends to be and tries to be glamarous and ends up being trapped by that obsession. She's a very bad dancer and singer and not really a great beauty but she's still human enough to realize that she's being dehumanized.
It's like Kim Novak in Vertigo. She's been a sticking point for many critics and Hitchcock himself because she isn't like the actresses who Hitchcock preferred like Ingrid Bergman or Grace Kelly who were classy and elegant while she's earthy and unrefined. But it works nonetheless.
"Ça va by me, madame...Ça va by me!" - The Red Shoes
I'm one of those who think that Martine Carol's lack of distinction is a plus, not a minus, for Lola Montes, so I tend to rank that highest. A lot of people bitterly disagree with me, and I respect their point of view.
Well I don't. Simply refusing to seriously consider a work of staggering complexity like Lola Montes because the actress wasn't classy enough is snobbish elitism and one of Ophuls' many objects of scorn in his final film.
I too would put "Le Plaisir" above "Madame de...".
Maybe it has got something to do with the stories (three for the price of one) being by Maupassant.
Well my favourite Ophuls is a film he made in Hollywood called The Reckless Moment starring Joan Bennett and James Mason. That film is damned to obscurity because..."Oh Ophuls made a hollywood film. We only like him when he's fin-de-siecle and adapting great literature" snobbism that's more or less dogged Ophuls like a millstone around his neck totally misunderstanding his great art.
Le Plaisir is a great film though. Better than La Ronde but not as fully realized as Madam de...(the actual French title of the film) because the characters never really take off, save for Jean Gabin's Joseph Rivet.
What I like about the film is the structure, the musical arrangement of the various story strands that creates this great centrepiece. People have never understood the film because they looked at it as an anthology film of three seperate stories when it's actually a single integrated theme that is developed in each story towards the shocking devastating ending.
"Ça va by me, madame...Ça va by me!" - The Red Shoes
[deleted]
The two films are so different.
Scostatevi profani! Melpomene son io...