Eclipse Series 8: Lubitsch Musicals
- Faux Hulot
- Jack Of All Tirades
- Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 11:57 am
- Location: Location, Location
Here's a little ditty to get you all warmed up...
-
- Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2005 4:28 pm
Just a note about The Smiling Lieutenant: on the laserdisc version, one shot was missing (as I recall): an insert of a newspaper headline saying "ROYALTY INSULTED! LIEUTENANT LAUGHS AT PRINCESS!" That shot is intact in the new set.
Also, the liner notes don't mention much about the operetta the film is based on, A Waltz Dream, so for the curious, here are some musical excerpts from Oscar Straus's original operetta, accompanying a clip from Lubitsch's The Marriage Circle. Most of these tunes, along with many others from A Waltz Dream, are used as background music in The Smiling Lieutenant.
As he and Raphaelson usually did when adapting stage works, Lubitsch and Raphaelson didn't keep much from A Waltz Dream and started the story long before the play begins -- the play starts with Niki's wedding -- but the basic plot is the same as is the resolution (though in the original it's more about Franzi teaching the princess to act Viennese, this being the ideal of all womanhood).
Also, the liner notes don't mention much about the operetta the film is based on, A Waltz Dream, so for the curious, here are some musical excerpts from Oscar Straus's original operetta, accompanying a clip from Lubitsch's The Marriage Circle. Most of these tunes, along with many others from A Waltz Dream, are used as background music in The Smiling Lieutenant.
As he and Raphaelson usually did when adapting stage works, Lubitsch and Raphaelson didn't keep much from A Waltz Dream and started the story long before the play begins -- the play starts with Niki's wedding -- but the basic plot is the same as is the resolution (though in the original it's more about Franzi teaching the princess to act Viennese, this being the ideal of all womanhood).
- whaleallright
- Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 12:56 am
Lubitsch and source material
Those interested in this topic should read Ben Brewster's article "The Circle: Lubitsch and the Theatrical Farce Tradition" in Film History vol. 13 (2001), pp. 372–89. PM me if you'd like a copy.
- davebert
- Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 4:00 pm
- Location: NY
- Contact:
What a great set! Having gone through most of it this weekend, the image quality was satisfactory and the films themselves were a real treat for my wife, whose favorite film--Love Me Tonight--has left her with a permanent Chevalier fix.
The timing on this release was also genius, and hopefully Criterion makes some money on the Valentine's business... I know my set was intended as a gift opened early. (This in spite of the long standing "no DVDs for V-Day" rule!)
The timing on this release was also genius, and hopefully Criterion makes some money on the Valentine's business... I know my set was intended as a gift opened early. (This in spite of the long standing "no DVDs for V-Day" rule!)
- jbeall
- Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 9:22 am
- Location: Atlanta-ish
Critic's Choice: New DVDs by Dave Kehr
Film history books recount how the four musicals directed by Ernst Lubitsch in the early years of sound — “The Love Parade” (1929), “Monte Carlo” (1930), “The Smiling Lieutenant” (1931) and “One Hour With You” (1932) — helped define what talking movies would be. Now all four have been released in “Lubitsch Musicals,” an indispensable boxed set from Eclipse.
-
- Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2005 4:28 pm
He said what they would be, not what they should be. Lubitsch's combination of stagy Broadway-style plots and dialogue with some additional "cinematic" flourishes probably did have a lot of influence on early talkies, especially because Love Parade was really considered a breakthrough at the time. (Samson Raphaelson thought it was the first talkie that really impressed him, even before he met Lubitsch.)davidhare wrote:As for these movies defining what the sound era would be, what about Sternberg (Morocco) or Lang (Testament of Dr Mabuse) fer chrissake.
I think to like Love Parade -- and I really enjoy it -- you kind of have to have a tolerance for the kind of jokes you get in Broadway shows of the time, the slightly corny, cute humor that was all over Broadway and got imported to early talkies. Guy Bolton, the most prolific Broadway musical librettist of the time, co-wrote Love Parade, hence the corny turns of phrase ("You call that a goose step? That isn't a chicken step!"). I love that kind of thing but it's undeniable that the level of joke writing improved a lot when Lubitsch brought in Raphaelson for Smiling Lieutenant.My problem - which others obviously don't share - is the quality of the material Lubitsch uses - pure Hungarian poshlosht.
One advantage that Love Parade has, though, is that it's the only one of Lubitsch's musicals that actually gives musical performers (Chevalier, MacDonald, Lupino Lane) a chance to do their stuff at any length. Unlike Mamoulian in Love Me Tonight, Lubitsch kept reducing the importance of songs until by the time of Merry Widow, there's only one really big number and no songs in the last half-hour of the picture.
- HerrSchreck
- Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2005 11:46 am
Speaking of Mamoulian, and foreshadowing the greatness of what talkies could achieve, Lube (within the musical/semimusical form on display here) never came near Applause, Mamoulians film debut from 1929-- nowhere within a split end dangling off the genitals of a flea--... a film which showed the greatness that sound film could achieve, but rarely has since and to this day.
- domino harvey
- Dot Com Dom
- Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm
- HerrSchreck
- Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2005 11:46 am
- domino harvey
- Dot Com Dom
- Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm
- domino harvey
- Dot Com Dom
- Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm
I tend to lean away from most homoerotic readings but I agree, as I thought the same thing while watching and I think it's about as blatantly executed as Lubitsch thought he could get away with.davidhare wrote:Further to Domino's post about Buchanan (a truly colorless performer in Monte Carlo!) and my favorite scene in that movie - the park bench scene between Buchanan and the hairdresser when Jack conspires the ruse to get to Jeanette's boudoir. Maybe it's only me but the way Lube plays off the gay innuendo here (as he does in a party scene between Horton and Marshall in Trouble in Paradise) is breathtakingly risque. But maybe I'm the only one reading the scenes this way!
- My Man Godfrey
- Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2007 2:47 pm
- Location: Austin
I'll third davidhare and domino -- you don't have to be on the lookout for homoerotic undercurrents to find them here -- although I'd go farther than domino on one point: Buchanan's performance in Monte Carlo is a disaster. Poor Jeanette MacDonald; the only contemporary analog I can imagine would be a love-triangle comedy in which someone like Zooey Deschanel or Kirsten Dunst was torn between her two suitors, Nathan Lane and Harvey Fierstein. Still, the movie is pretty charming -- it's Lubitsch, after all -- and you're right -- "Trimmin' Women" is hilarious.domino harvey wrote:I tend to lean away from most homoerotic readings but I agree, as I thought the same thing while watching and I think it's about as blatantly executed as Lubitsch thought he could get away with.davidhare wrote:Further to Domino's post about Buchanan (a truly colorless performer in Monte Carlo!) and my favorite scene in that movie - the park bench scene between Buchanan and the hairdresser when Jack conspires the ruse to get to Jeanette's boudoir. Maybe it's only me but the way Lube plays off the gay innuendo here (as he does in a party scene between Horton and Marshall in Trouble in Paradise) is breathtakingly risque. But maybe I'm the only one reading the scenes this way!
PS: The most influential and important of all film critics -- I refer to myself, of course -- has weighed in on the set here.
- denti alligator
- Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:36 pm
- Location: "born in heaven, raised in hell"
This must be the first Criterion release that specifies aspect ratios not corresponding to any "standard" ones (1.33, 1.19, 1.85, etc.).
The Love Parade is listed as 1.21
Monte Carlo as 1.20
The Smiling Lieutenant 1.21
One Hour With You 1.36
I always thought "1.33" was shorthand for what was essentially 1.37, but now they put 1.36?! What's with the specificity here?
The Love Parade is listed as 1.21
Monte Carlo as 1.20
The Smiling Lieutenant 1.21
One Hour With You 1.36
I always thought "1.33" was shorthand for what was essentially 1.37, but now they put 1.36?! What's with the specificity here?
- domino harvey
- Dot Com Dom
- Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm
- whaleallright
- Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 12:56 am
Many early sound films were released using the old gauge, but with a strip on the side taken away for the soundtrack. Thus an aspect ratio that's more square than rectangular (typically between 1.1 and 1.2). This applies to such films as ANGELS WITH DIRTY FACES and VAMPYR. A year later, appropriate adjustments were made so that the Academy ratio could be restored, hence ONE HOUR WITH YOU.The Love Parade is listed as 1.21
Monte Carlo as 1.20
The Smiling Lieutenant 1.21
One Hour With You 1.36
- Jeff
- Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 9:49 pm
- Location: Denver, CO
Yes, but those early sound films usually have a reported aspect ratio of 1.19, and Academy ratio films usually have 1.37. I think that denti was just commenting that it was odd that Criterion is offering very specific, non-standard measurements this time. Perhaps this is a policy change wherein they will be reporting the actual measured ratio of the transfer, rather than theoretical ratio of the negative. Either way, the difference between 1.19 and 1.21 is utterly negligible.jonah.77 wrote:Many early sound films were released using the old gauge, but with a strip on the side taken away for the soundtrack. Thus an aspect ratio that's more square than rectangular (typically between 1.1 and 1.2). This applies to such films as ANGELS WITH DIRTY FACES and VAMPYR. A year later, appropriate adjustments were made so that the Academy ratio could be restored, hence ONE HOUR WITH YOU.
- denti alligator
- Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:36 pm
- Location: "born in heaven, raised in hell"
Yes, that's all I was pointing out. At Criterion's webpage it still says "1.33" for the whole set. These very specific measurements are new.Jeff wrote:Yes, but those early sound films usually have a reported aspect ratio of 1.19, and Academy ratio films usually have 1.37. I think that denti was just commenting that it was odd that Criterion is offering very specific, non-standard measurements this time. Perhaps this is a policy change wherein they will be reporting the actual measured ratio of the transfer, rather than theoretical ratio of the negative. Either way, the difference between 1.19 and 1.21 is utterly negligible.
- domino harvey
- Dot Com Dom
- Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm
Despite Hopkins doing her best, the Smiling Lieutenant was a major disappointment. Very few laughs, most of them in the last twenty minutes. The songs, save the last one, were forgettable and the film seemed like such a colossal step-down in energy from the previous two. I am shocked that this is the most well-regarded of the lot. It's not a bad film to be sure, but outside of the above mentioned song and the wonderful, very Lubitsch ending with the checkerboard, it felt stagnated.
- davebert
- Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 4:00 pm
- Location: NY
- Contact:
*spoilers on the Smiling ending*
My wife was appalled at the ending to The Smiling Lieutenant, which suggested to her (and to me too, to be honest) a creepy notion that women are merely an empty vessel that become exactly the same so long as they are updated in the proper fashion.
In other words, even though Colbert's girl was there first - and there was nothing in the story to suggest that she had lost her standing with Chevalier - he was perfectly happy to let her go for the latecomer Hopkins as soon as Hopkins exhibited a few of the tricks she was taught. The ending was very funny and elegantly choreographed, with the tossing about of the checkerboard, but the tossing aside of Colbert without an explanation dulled the effect of this fortunate turn of events.
So far, Love Parade remains my favorite from the set.
My wife was appalled at the ending to The Smiling Lieutenant, which suggested to her (and to me too, to be honest) a creepy notion that women are merely an empty vessel that become exactly the same so long as they are updated in the proper fashion.
In other words, even though Colbert's girl was there first - and there was nothing in the story to suggest that she had lost her standing with Chevalier - he was perfectly happy to let her go for the latecomer Hopkins as soon as Hopkins exhibited a few of the tricks she was taught. The ending was very funny and elegantly choreographed, with the tossing about of the checkerboard, but the tossing aside of Colbert without an explanation dulled the effect of this fortunate turn of events.
So far, Love Parade remains my favorite from the set.
-
- Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2005 4:28 pm
I always saw it more as a knock on the Chevalier character, who is the real empty vessel here, so much so that he doesn't care which woman he's with as long as she provides the "ta-ta-ra-ta-ta-ta-ta-ta-ta." The two women are both treated much more sympathetically than he is, anyway, so I think the ending is really more against him than against them.My wife was appalled at the ending to The Smiling Lieutenant, which suggested to her (and to me too, to be honest) a creepy notion that women are merely an empty vessel that become exactly the same so long as they are updated in the proper fashion.
I'll admit that this is one movie that does not work as well at home as it does in a theatre (where it always kills). I'm not sure exactly why, but many of the jokes get huge laughs for reasons that can't quite be explained. (Chevalier's "Remember what Napoleon said before he went to Elba... so long!" sounds like nothing on paper, but brings the house down at theatrical screenings.)
- GringoTex
- Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 5:57 am
Just watched The Love Parade for the first time and was blown away. If anyone can point to an earlier film that better prefigures the musical genre, I want to hear about it.
This being Lubitsch's first sound film and musical, I expected something a bit obvious and grotesque. Rather, he proved himself the master of the ellipsis even at this early stage. By my count, there are 76 shots of people opening either doors, windows, or curtains within a 105 minute span. Movement takes precedence over the payoff. Contrast this to the highly overrated Love Me Tonight, where I'm simply begging Mamoulian to stumble to the next setpiece with cinema intact.
This being Lubitsch's first sound film and musical, I expected something a bit obvious and grotesque. Rather, he proved himself the master of the ellipsis even at this early stage. By my count, there are 76 shots of people opening either doors, windows, or curtains within a 105 minute span. Movement takes precedence over the payoff. Contrast this to the highly overrated Love Me Tonight, where I'm simply begging Mamoulian to stumble to the next setpiece with cinema intact.
- HerrSchreck
- Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2005 11:46 am
Well there's a point of view.
Lubitsch-- and I'll get some belligerance for this I'm sure-- was a sharp spieler in melodrama, with some exalted moments like Trouble In Paradise and Shop, and some hilarious moments in Germany. But as a weaver of cinema I find his form mostly hugely overrated, working backward from Heaven Can Wait (one of the two or three CC's I wanted to return), way back to Merry Jailer (couldn't finish it), The Wildcat. His fun early material like I Don't Want To Be A Man is no more amusing than The Delicious Little Devil, a wild piece of 1919 insanity with Mae Murray. Nor was it directed with any more flair than a Bout de Zan throwaway short. Fun comedy. There was an awful lot of that sort of comedy floating around back then if you trufflepig for it.
If outside of Trouble Lube ever made a film as good as City Streets, Applause, or Dr Jekyll & Mr Hyde I'm all ears. These early musicals are wildly hit or miss, compared to Mamoulians unmatched opening blast into the zone beginning w Applause and ending somewheres around his own weakening point at Christina.
Lubitsch-- and I'll get some belligerance for this I'm sure-- was a sharp spieler in melodrama, with some exalted moments like Trouble In Paradise and Shop, and some hilarious moments in Germany. But as a weaver of cinema I find his form mostly hugely overrated, working backward from Heaven Can Wait (one of the two or three CC's I wanted to return), way back to Merry Jailer (couldn't finish it), The Wildcat. His fun early material like I Don't Want To Be A Man is no more amusing than The Delicious Little Devil, a wild piece of 1919 insanity with Mae Murray. Nor was it directed with any more flair than a Bout de Zan throwaway short. Fun comedy. There was an awful lot of that sort of comedy floating around back then if you trufflepig for it.
If outside of Trouble Lube ever made a film as good as City Streets, Applause, or Dr Jekyll & Mr Hyde I'm all ears. These early musicals are wildly hit or miss, compared to Mamoulians unmatched opening blast into the zone beginning w Applause and ending somewheres around his own weakening point at Christina.