Applause (1929)

Applause (1929)

Comments 1 comment

“The kid deserves a better break. Why, this burlesque racket is no place for her!”

Synopsis:
An aging burlesque star (Helen Morgan) with a manipulative boyfriend (Fuller Mellish, Jr.) tries to prevent her daughter (Joan Peers) — who has fallen in love with a kind sailor (Henry Wadsworth) — from following in her footsteps.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Has-Beens
  • Rouben Mamoulian Films
  • Showgirls
  • Single Mothers

Review:
Rouben Mamoulian’s directorial debut remains one of the most creatively conceived early talkies; as noted in Stuart Galbraith IV’s review for DVD Talk, “Compared with the stage-bound, bolt-the-camera-to-the-floor look of nearly all the earliest sound films, Applause is downright astounding.” A glimpse at the stills below provides evidence of Mamoulian’s (and cinematographer George J. Folsey’s) visual brilliance and effective use of on-location shooting. The film is also notable for providing torch singer Helen Morgan with one of a handful of leading cinematic roles as a Stella Dallas-like mother sacrificing all for her daughter. Unfortunately, the storyline itself is pure melodrama through-and-through, with few surprises and many cliches, making this one merely recommended rather than must-see.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Creative direction and cinematography



  • Fine on-location shooting

Must See?
No, though it’s certainly worth a look. Listed as a film with Historical Importance in the back of Peary’s book.

Links:

Picture of Dorian Gray, The (1945)

Picture of Dorian Gray, The (1945)

Comments 1 comment

“There can be something fatal about a portrait.”

Synopsis:
Goaded by a corrupt lord (George Sanders), a handsome young aristocrat (Hurd Hatfield) offers his soul to the devil if he can appear as young as he looks in a portrait painted by his friend (Lowell Gilmore). He soon finds that his misdeeds — including his cruel mistreatment of a lovely young singer (Angela Lansbury) — show up on the painting while he himself remains ageless; but he must eventually make some challenging decisions when the suitor (Peter Lawford) of Gilmore’s niece (Donna Reed) is determined to find out why Hatfield keeps one room in his house permanently locked.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Angela Lansbury Films
  • Donna Reed Films
  • George Sanders Films
  • Historical Drama
  • Hurd Hatfield Films
  • Pact With the Devil
  • Peter Lawford Films

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary writes that this “handsomely produced” MGM adaptation of Oscar Wilde’s late-19th century story is “strikingly photographed by Harry Stradling (who won an Oscar), and literately scripted by director Albert Lewin” but is ultimately “too tasteful for a film about a sinner”. He accurately points out that “miscast Hatfield’s scoundrel, who is repeatedly shown standing stiff and emotionless like a mannequin, is not active or imaginative enough to be feared”.

Indeed, Hatfield’s frustratingly flat performance — presumably (mis)guided by Lewin — brings the entire movie to a halt; with his character acting more like a “model” in a Robert Bresson film than a blue-blooded sociopath (and nearly all of his “wicked acts… kept off screen”), we’re hard-pressed to feel engaged in the scenario one way or another. Are we meant to feel sorry for Gray, who appears to have been naively corrupted by the (perfectly typecast) epigraph-spouting Sanders? And why doesn’t Sanders’ character — who “gets a charge out of Gray’s insensitivity” — show up more often in the second half of the film?

Meanwhile, the film’s biggest “reveal” is, naturally, the hideous state of the continuously morphing titular painting.

We’re given plenty of teasers — with shot after shot of a character looking in horror at the portrait we can’t see — before a flash of Technicolor finally reveals what the painting has turned into, at which point we can’t help guffawing.

While mid-20th-century audiences may have been aghast at the purulent evidence of Gray’s “moral leprosy”, the painting today comes across like an escaped artifact from A Bucket of Blood (1959) or Color Me Blood Red (1965). Thankfully, the rest of the film is aesthetically pleasing, with scrupulously staged scenes of hollow interactions occurring in cavernous halls, effectively photographed in atmospheric black-and-white:

The mid-film murder scene is particularly memorable. But on the whole, this adaptation doesn’t live up to its potential.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Fine production values
  • Harry Stradling’s Oscar-winning cinematography
  • An effectively staged murder sequence

Must See?
No; this one isn’t must-see.

Links:

People Will Talk (1951)

People Will Talk (1951)

Comments 1 comment

“You’re quite a noble character, aren’t you?”

Synopsis:
A well-intentioned doctor (Cary Grant) accompanied by a stoic yet loyal assistant (Finlay Currie) marries a suicidal pregnant woman (Jeanne Crain) out of both concern and love, while being pestered by a jealous colleague (Hume Cronyn) desperate to reveal questionable elements of Grant and Currie’s mysterious pasts.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Cary Grant Films
  • Do-Gooders
  • Doctors and Nurses
  • Hume Cronyn Films
  • Jeanne Crain Films
  • Joseph L. Mankiewicz Films
  • Pregnancy
  • Romantic Comedy

Review:
This most unusual “romantic comedy” — written and directed by Joseph Mankiewicz, and based on a play by German playwright Curt Goetz — is usually referred to as a thinly veiled commentary on anti-Communist hysteria and witch hunts in 1950s America. While it doesn’t really succeed as such, it does remain a bold, often cleverly scripted antidote to most of the overly sanitized films being produced in Hollywood at the time. Cary Grant’s Dr. Praetorius represents an idealistic vision of what humanity could be like if only our actions were led by compassion and logic rather than suspicion and priggish morality.

His “rescue” of an unwed, pregnant, suicidal woman is initially posited as a deceptive maneuver to save her life, but we soon realize he’s simply allowing powerful emotions to drive his sense of justice and righteous living (perhaps much like Jesus?). Dr. Praetorius is so superior to slimy leches like jealous Professor Elwell (Cronyn) that it’s clear he’ll win the day; the entire film basically plays out how this triumph occurs.

Unfortunately, Grant wasn’t the best choice for this most unusual of romantic male leads; it’s much easier to imagine a more nuanced actor — like Spencer Tracy — investing the character with inspired depth. Crain is fine as Grant’s loyal wife, but never really transcends what’s required of her in the role. The supporting roles are more successful: Cronyn is spot-on as weaselly Elwell:

… Currie gives a memorable performance as the mysterious lumbering “Shunderson”:

… and Margaret Hamilton is nicely typecast as a suspicious shrew brought in during the first scene to bolster Cronyn’s growing case against Grant and Currie.

Ultimately, this odd title remains a mixed bag: intriguing and different enough to be worth checking out, but not entirely successful.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • An often wittily acerbic script
  • Milton Krasner’s cinematography

Must See?
No, though it’s worth a one-time look if you’re curious.

Links:

Swiss Family Robinson (1960)

Swiss Family Robinson (1960)

Comments 1 comment

“What about our sons? What future is there here for them?”

Synopsis:
A Swiss family — father (John Mills), mother (Dorothy McGuire), and three sons (Tommy Kirk, James MacArthur, and Kevin Corcoran) — emigrating to New Guinea in the early 19th century is shipwrecked on a remote island, and must fight against marauding pirates while rebuilding their lives and rescuing a captured teenage girl (Janet Munro).

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Dorothy McGuire Films
  • John Mills Films
  • Pirates
  • Survival

Review:
This enormously popular adaptation of Johann David Wyss’s 1812 novel is notable as the first widescreen Disney movie filmed with Panavision lenses, and for its fabled location shooting on the island of Tobago. According to TCM’s article, filming conditions were often treacherous, with star John Mills stating in an interview:

“If a scorpion doesn’t bite me during the night I get into the car, and if it doesn’t skid off the edge of a cliff, I reach the mangrove swamp. I walk through; and if I’m not sucked in by a quick-sand, eaten alive by land crabs, or bitten by a snake, I reach the beach. I change on the beach, trying to avoid being devoured by insects, and walk into the sea. If there are no sharks or barracudas about, we get the shot — and then do the whole thing in reverse, providing, of course, we haven’t died of sunstroke in the meantime.”

Dozens of animals from around the world were shipped to the island, under the care of no less than 14 trainers. The movie cost 4.5 million dollars to make, but was (and remained) so popular it is considered one of the most profitable films of all time — and its fame lives on through reconstructions of the family’s elaborate treehouse at theme parks around the world.

Unfortunately, despite its beloved status, the film is far from a true classic. There’s plenty of adventure to be had, but it’s all so patently unbelievable — a chase between people riding zebras and ostriches?? — that only the youngest or most naive of viewers will be taken in. The two primary plot elements driving the narrative are the family’s attempts to stave off a persistent band of pirates (led by Sessue Hayakawa), and the love triangle that instantly emerges when the two older Robinson brothers conveniently stumble upon (and easily rescue) a teenage girl. Who will win her heart? How will the other boy handle his defeat? Munro is a sweet and lovely actress, but her characterization here does no favors to her gender, and is especially disappointing after her sparkling turn in Disney’s Darby O’Gill and the Little People (1959) the year before. [Thankfully, she got back on track with her notable performance as a deep-throated romantic interest the following year in The Day the Earth Caught Fire (1961).]

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Beautiful cinematography on the island of Tobago

Must See?
No; this one is only must-see for fans who remember it fondly from their childhood.

Links:

Real Life (1979)

Real Life (1979)

Comments 1 comment

“We want the greatest show of all: life!”

Synopsis:
A pushy film director (Albert Brooks) recruits an “ordinary” American family — Charles Grodin, Frances Lee McCain, Lisa Urette, and Robert Stirrat — to open up their house to a documentary crew and two psychologists (Matthew Tobin and J.A. Preston).

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Albert Brooks Films
  • Directors
  • Mockumentaries
  • Family Problems

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary writes that this “reasonably funny satire” — which “pokes fun at PBS’s American Family series that presented the lives of the Louds in cinema verite style — shows that “the presence of a camera alters reality” and “asserts that documentarians have a lot of gall to take their cameras into people’s homes to exploit them”. Given that reality television is now beyond de rigeur (and few younger viewers will have seen the original series), director-star Albert Brooks’ satirical insights no longer pack the same punch; 21st century audiences understand how “reality” is inevitably obscured by being filmed, and (thanks to ample mass media coverage) have a more nuanced view of what it means for participants to be “exploited” while simultaneously exploiting the genre for their own fame and gain. With that said, as Peary notes, the movie “has peculiar insight into family life, some believable characterizations, and several truly hilarious scenes”, including Brooks singing “to Phoenix residents about how he ‘sincerely’ appreciates them; the visit to McCain’s crooked gynecologist; and Grodin’s showing incompetence while operating on a horse”. (I also enjoy the slow-mo montage sequence.)

However, things get off to a creaky start as soon as filming begins in the Yeagers’ house, as we’re shown how the Yeagers’ “normal” appearance during the audition process masked (who knew?!) a darker suburban reality of bitchy wives, petulant children, and put-upon, milquetoast husbands. McCain’s immediate crush on Brooks — while strategically fueling the ego of his “opportunist” character “whose integrity and sensitivity come and go” — feels patently false, and the two kids are instantly forgettable. Although Peary argues that the secondary plotline involving “Brooks’s meetings with psychologists and studio executives” causes the film to lose momentum, I disagree; I actually find Brooks’ character (as obnoxious as he is) the most perversely interesting and authentic in the film, and his dealings with a faceless producer ring all-too-true. The film’s denouement is reasonably inspired, and zany enough to leave us feeling that this film is really about outsized Hollywood egos run amok.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Some amusing moments
  • Brooks’ no-holds-barred performance as (a variation on) himself

Must See?
No, though you’ll certainly want to check it out if you’re an Albert Brooks fan.

(Listed in 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die)

Links:

Olympiad, The/Olympia (1936)

Olympiad, The/Olympia (1936)

Comments 1 comment

“For the last time, the athletes have to fight with all their might.”

Synopsis:
Athletes from around the world compete in the 1936 Berlin Olympics, as Adolf Hitler watches from the sidelines.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Documentary
  • German Films
  • Olympics
  • Sports

Response to Peary’s Review:
Peary argues that this “two-part film of the Berlin Olympics of 1936” — “regarded as one of the best documentaries ever made”, as well as “among the most controversial” — is “extremely disappointing”, given that “there is virtually no excitement on any event” and we “have no idea who most of the athletes are [or] what their strategies will be”. He concedes that some of the “best moments in this long, interesting, but overrated documentary… are the close-ups of the athletes’ faces, the shots of cheering fans in the grandstands, and, of course the heralded [final] diving montage in which faceless, acrobatic bodies become one with the sky, air, and water”. He notes the interesting fact that “the clips we always see of [Jesse] Owens setting Olympic records (and thus disputing the Nazi myth of white supremacy) are taken from this documentary, but that [the] shot of unhappy Hitler we always see after Owens’s victories was taken from another part of the movie and… had nothing to do with his reaction to Owens”. Finally, he points out that despite being regarded as “fascistic” because “it idealizes athletes as beautifully built, superhuman figures”, Riefenstahl “gives fair coverage to events in which Germans lost”.

Indeed, given its reputation as yet another propaganda-laden film by the infamous Nazi-affiliated director of Triumph of the Will (1935), Olympia — officially titled Olympia Part One: Festival of the Nations and Olympia Part Two: Festival of Beauty — comes across as surprisingly even-handed in its representation of athletes from across the globe. The primary indicators that this film was made in pre-WWII Germany are the presence of swastika-laden German flags, several collective heil-salutes, and reaction shots of Hitler and his key henchmen in the audience. Regardless of her political affiliations (which of course one shouldn’t dismiss or forget), Leni Riefenstahl was an undeniably brilliant filmmaker. Although the film is too long to enjoy in one setting, and often repetitive, I find it far from boring; Riefenstahl could have chosen a different, more personal approach to filming this material, and edited more strategically, but her decision — to show a range of incredible sporting talent and physical beauty across nations — seems defensible. One finishes this marathon, two-part documentary with an appreciation for what the Olympics are (in part, ideally) designed to do: allow gifted athletes to compete as humans while simultaneously bringing honor to their homelands.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Gorgeous cinematography and direction
  • Valuable historical footage of early Olympics games set in a notorious global era

Must See?
Yes, for its historical significance and aesthetic value.

Categories

  • Historically Relevant

(Listed in 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die)

Links:

Wizard of Oz, The (1939)

Wizard of Oz, The (1939)

Comments 1 comment

NOTE: This re-posting of an older review is part of the My Favorite Classic Movie Blogathon in celebration of National Classic Movie Day (May 16th). Click here to view the schedule listing all the great posts in this blogathon.

“Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!”

Synopsis:
A misunderstood Kansas farmgirl (Judy Garland) dreams that she has been transported to the wonderful world of Oz, where she meets a scarecrow with no brain (Ray Bolger), a tin man with no heart (Jack Haley), and a cowardly lion (Bert Lahr).

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Coming-of-Age
  • Fantasy
  • Frank Morgan Films
  • Judy Garland Films
  • Musicals
  • Victor Fleming Films
  • Witches, Wizards, and Magicians

Response to Peary’s Review:
One of the all-time great cinematic fantasies, The Wizard of Oz (a cult favorite) has become a part of our collective consciousness; as Peary notes, “The effect this Hollywood classic has had on Americans cannot be overestimated.” It’s a rare children’s film which holds equal appeal for adults — indeed, adults will enjoy it on a completely different level — and bears multiple, repeat viewings. In addition to the stunning Technicolor cinematography, creative set designs, clever special effects, and classic songs, the acting in Oz is top-notch: watch young Garland’s face as she reacts to the characters around her; she’s genuinely scared or delighted or angry, not merely pretending to be. Margaret Hamilton earns instant kudos in dual performances as both Miss Gulch (who represents every unreasonable, child-hating adult we’ve ever known) and the Wicked Witch (poor Hamilton had the perfect features for this role). Equally enjoyable are Bolger (what a dancer!), Lahr (what facial expressions!), and Haley as Dorothy’s friends; their camaraderie together never seems forced.

Rewatching Oz for the first time recently as an adult, I was struck by how skillfully the filmmakers managed to blend comedy (as when Professor Marvel convinces the naive Dorothy that he knows all about her life back on the farm), terror (the over-sized hourglass in the witch’s castle still fills me with anxious fear), and surrealism (what in the heck is a Lollipop Guild?!) into a colorful musical. The narrative never lags, moving smoothly from one phase of Dorothy’s journey to the next — and, even when we think the denouement has arrived (Dorothy and her friends successfully snag the witch’s broomstick and bring it to the Wizard), there’s more to (over)come.

While some have argued that it’s overrated, and Peary asserts that the film’s “There’s no place like home” theme “is nonsense”, there’s more going on here than meets the eye. As noted so succinctly in Time Out’s review, Oz “exposes our childhood anxieties about abandonment and powerlessness and brings to light the tension between the repressive comforts of home and the liberating terrors of the unknown marking all our adult lives.” After her successful venture into the strange, magical, terrible land of Oz, Dorothy ultimately learns that she’s in control of her own destiny — no small feat for a young girl (or boy) coming of age.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Judy Garland’s sensitive, heartfelt portrayal as Dorothy (Peary nominates her for an Alternate Oscar as best actress of the year)
  • Ray Bolger as Dorothy’s first friend in Oz, the Scarecrow
  • Burt Lahr as the Cowardly Lion
  • Jack Haley as the Tin Man
  • Margaret Hamilton as Miss Gulch and the Wicked Witch of the West

  • “Terry” as the most famous dog in cinematic history: Toto
  • Frank Morgan in a plethora of amusing roles

  • Dorothy being reunited with Toto after he’s run away from Miss Gulch
  • The frightening tornado scene
  • The talking apple trees
  • Many genuinely scary moments in the witch’s castle
  • Magical costumes and sets
  • The simple yet effective special effects
  • Luminous technicolor cinematography
  • Consistently clever lyrics:

    “The wind began to swish / The house, to pitch / And suddenly the hinges started to unhitch / Just then the Witch / To satisfy an itch / Was flying on her broomstick, thumbing for a hitch / And oh, what happened then was rich!”

  • The enjoyable musical score, including such favorites as “Over the Rainbow” (nearly cut), “Ding Dong the Witch is Dead”, “We’re Off to See the Wizard”, and many more
  • Countless memorable, classic lines:

    “Toto, I’ve [got] a feeling we’re not in Kansas anymore…”

Must See?
Of course — multiple times. Peary awards it an Alternate Oscar as best picture of the year. Discussed at length in Peary’s Cult Movies (1981).

Categories

  • Cult Movie
  • Genuine Classic
  • Oscar Winner or Nominee

(Listed in 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die)

Links:

Peggy Sue Got Married (1986)

Peggy Sue Got Married (1986)

Comments 1 comment

“I had a tough day.”

Synopsis:
A former prom queen (Kathleen Turner) married to a philandering car salesman (Nicolas Cage) collapses at her high school reunion and wakes up to find herself a teenager again, living with her parents (Don Murray and Barbara Harris) and viewing her existence from a new perspective.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Barbara Harris Films
  • Coming of Age
  • Don Murray Films
  • Francis Ford Coppola Films
  • John Carradine Films
  • Kathleen Turner Films
  • Marital Problems
  • Nicolas Cage Films
  • Time Travel

Review:
Francis Ford Coppola has had a noticeably varied career, directing such indisputable classics as The Godfather (1970), The Godfather II (1974), The Conversation (1974), and Apocalypse Now (1979) in addition to much more experimental and/or independent fare — i.e., Dementia 13 (1963), Finian’s Rainbow (1969), The Rain People (1969), One From the Heart (1982), and The Outsiders (1983). It’s difficult to say which category Peggy Sue Got Married was meant to fit into, but it’s an unfortunate disappointment regardless. Compared (as it inevitably is) with Back to the Future (1985) — the immensely popular sci-fi time-travel tale released the year before — Peggy Sue… comes across as overly nostalgic, lacking in any real narrative tension, and bogged down by the terrible miscasting of Nicolas Cage as Peggy Sue’s insufferable beau and husband:

It’s possible this story could have been salvaged if we cared even a bit more for the flawed man she’s saddled with both as a teen and an adult. Watch either Back to the Future or Romy and Michelle’s High School Reunion (1997) for a much more engaging take on the topics covered here.

Note: Knowing that Penny Marshall was originally set to direct this title (with Debra Winger in the lead) also puts the entire project in a different, slightly more sensical light.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Kathleen Turner as Peggy Sue
  • Fine period detail

  • Lovely cinematography

Must See?
No; only check this one out if you’re curious.

Links:

Intermezzo: A Love Story (1939)

Intermezzo: A Love Story (1939)

Comments 2 comments

NOTE: I’m posting this review and the next one as part of the Classic Movie Blog Association’s “Fabulous Films of the 30s” spring blogathon. When I committed to writing about “Intermezzo” (both versions), I honestly didn’t know whether they would classify as ‘fabulous’ or not, since I hadn’t watched the 1939 version in many years, and had never seen the original. While both unfortunately failed the test of fabulous-ness (they’re not “must-see” classics of the decade), their luminous star — the inimitable Ingrid Bergman — is as classic and fabulous as they come! So, I’m happy to introduce you to both Bergman’s first Hollywood film, and the film responsible for bringing her to English-speaking audiences.

“I wonder if anyone has ever built happiness on the unhappiness of others?”

Synopsis:
A talented pianist (Ingrid Bergman) giving lessons to a young girl (Ann E. Todd) falls in love with Todd’s father (Leslie Howard), a famous violinist whose long-suffering wife (Edna Best) realizes their marriage is at risk.

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Cecil Kellaway Films
  • Ingrid Bergman Films
  • Leslie Howard Films
  • Musicians
  • Romance
  • Star-Crossed Lovers

Review:
Ingrid Bergman was wooed to Hollywood by David Selznick after he witnessed her stunning presence in the 1936 Swedish romance Intermezzo (1936), which was remade in English nearly scene-for-scene several years later. In both films, Bergman’s star-struck young beauty harbors an enormous crush on the famous father (Howard) of her pupil, and ultimately can’t resist her romantic longings. Will things end well for the sinning couple — especially given how sympathetic Howard’s wife (Best) remains? Not likely. The entire affair is presented in an overly tasteful fashion, with characters solemnly making comments such as “Love isn’t sensible” while gazing into each other’s eyes and spending time in beautiful locales. A zither appears at one point, adding a bit of musical distinction and presenting a young girl (Marie Flynn) meant to evoke Howard’s sense of paternal obligation and love. There is ultimately little here to hold onto in terms of narrative; Intermezzo only remains distinctive at this point for its visual classiness (Gregg Toland’s cinematography is impeccable) and for Bergman’s luminous beauty. She’s a delight to watch no matter what material she’s given.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Ingrid Bergman as Anita
  • Gregg Toland’s cinematography

Must See?
No; like its predecessor, this one is only must-see for Bergman fans.

Links:

Intermezzo (1936)

Intermezzo (1936)

Comments 1 comment

“Is it a crime to realize I can’t live without you?”

Synopsis:
An aspiring pianist (Ingrid Bergman) falls in love with the violinist-father (Gosta Ekman) of one of her pupils (Britt Hagman), eventually causing the break-up of Ekman’s marriage to his long-suffering wife (Inga Tidblad).

Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:

  • Ingrid Bergman Films
  • Musicians
  • Scandinavian Films
  • Star-Crossed Lovers

Review:
21-year-old Ingrid Bergman is positively luminous in this Swedish romantic melodrama, known for causing Hollywood (David Selznick in particular) to take notice of Bergman’s charms and woo her across the ocean (where she soon starred in a nearly identical English-language remake). The storyline itself is simplistic and (mostly) predictable, with all key players interacting oh-so-tastefully with one another as they voice hoary dialogue (“A human being feels this happiness only once in their life”) while passionate classical music plays in the background. The movie is primarily of interest to film fanatics due to Bergman’s presence: it’s instantly clear why she was considered a cinematic gem worth cultivating. Åke Dahlqvist’s cinematography highlights her considerable beauty and vitality, making this a visually pleasant if overly genteel film to sit through.

Redeeming Qualities and Moments:

  • Ingrid Bergman as Anita
  • Fine cinematography

Must See?
No; this one will only be of interest to diehard Bergman fans (who will likely feel rewarded by a viewing). Listed as a film with Historical value in the back of Peary’s book.

Links: