Lucky Lady

From Monthly Film Bulletin, February 1976 (Vol. 43, No. 505). — J.R.

With an outsized budget estimated variously at $12,600,000

(Variety) and £10,000,000 (Daily Mirror), three box-office favourites

and a script deliberately written, according to co-author Gloria

Katz, as “the most commercial thing we could think up”, Lucky

Lady is both conspicuously overproduced and undernourished.

The presence of Stanley Donen seems to count for little in a project

that might more logically have been entrusted to a computer. All

it has to express, quite simply, are its deliberations: to combine

as many saleable features as can be packed on a screen within the

space of two hours. A little of everything is thus tossed into the

mixture; and a great deal of nothing emerges out of the isolation

and autonomy of the assorted elements. For Cabaret-like nostalgia,

Geoffrey Unsworth creates a hazy milk-of-magnesia look with

a dull sheen that obscures the details of the expensive sets and

sea battles, both of which seem to derive from other models.

As the leading lady, Liza Minnelli is dressed in a fright wig worthy

of a nightmare dreamt by Robert Aldrich, given two unmemorable

songs to sing, and encouraged or allowed to deliver each comic line

(sample: “It’s so quiet you can hear a fish fart”) as if she were

explaining it to a child of four, crushing gags like so many acorns

in her wake. The jolly argumentative ménage à trois reflects an

intention to bolster the bantering male duo of The Sting or The

Fortune with a small dash of kinkiness (within AA Certificate limits)

out of the Bonnie and Clyde cycle, but this in turn has been altered

by a last-minute change in casting (Gene Hackman replaced George

Segal when the latter became ill), which adds an irrelevant taste of

Night Moves to the blend. It is harder to guess at a strategy behind

the tinny soundtrack — where all the voices seem to occupy the same

disembodied plane — unless one cites a box-office precedent like

Deep Throat or The Night Porter; but Burt Reynolds’ rendition of

“Ain’t Misbehavin’ ” with a 78 r.p.m. record does suggest a possible

fusion of At Long Last Love and Lady Sings the Blues. The absence

of any ruling principle that might unify such combinations is sadly

reflected in the public protest lodged by Liza Minnelli and Burt

Reynolds against Donen’s decision to change the movie’s ending,

which originally had the two male leads killed by federal agents.

According to Minnelli, “The changes made in the film mark the

difference between a work of art and a commercial movie” — an

astonishing notion in relation to the film as it now stands, which

could end a dozen different ways without substantially altering

anything. If, however, it had concluded with the entire fleet of

battling ships and all the characters consumed by one enormous

tidal wave, thereby assimilating the disaster film and the science

fiction epic into its strategies, it might have broadened its horizons

far enough to encompass a few moments of old-fashioned entertainment.

JONATHAN ROSENBAUM

Published on 10 Feb 1976 in Notes, by jrosenbaum

Comments Off

THE LATE MATHIAS PASCAL (1976 review)

From Monthly Film Bulletin, February 1976 (Vol. 43, No. 505). A tinted restoration of this film was presented at Bologna’s Il Cinema Ritrovato with a beautiful, large-orchestra score composed and conducted by Timothy Brock a few years back, and I must say that this very impressive presentation substantially transformed my original skepticism, fully demonstrating how much difference a serious archival restoration can make. And now Flicker Alley has just brought out this version on a lovely Blu-Ray, which I can heartily recommend. – J.R.

Feu Mathias Pascal

(The Late Mathias Pascal)

France, 1925                                      Director: Marcel L’Herbier

Miragno, Italy. Acting on behalf of herself, her son Mathias and

her sister-in-law Scolastique, Maria Pascal authorises agent

Batta Maldagna to sell her property; worried about her debts, he

sells it at one-sixth its value. Mathias’ shy friend Pomino, secretly in

Iove with Romilde Pescatore, asks Mathias to propose to her on his

behalf at a village fête. Discovering that she is-in love with himself,

Mathias marries her instead, but soon finds his life made miserable

by his shrewish mother-in-law, who holds sway over Romilde. He

goes to work at the chaotic municipal library, where his time is

largely spent contriving to catch rats. After the nearly simultaneous

deaths of his mother and infant daughter, he flees to Monte Carlo

where, by following the advice of a gambler who tells him to bet on

12, he unexpectedly wins a fortune. On the train back to Miragno,

he reads an account of his own suicide in a newspaper and decides

to take advantage of this mistake by assuming a new identity.

Switching trains, he proceeds to Rome and begins to check into a

luxury hotel until he realises that he cannot refister without giving

himself away. Renting a room from Anselmo-Paleari, and calling

himself Mr. Adrien after hearing the name of Anselmo’s daughter

Adrienne, he falls in love with her and is horrified to discover that

she’s engaged to tourist guide Térence Papiano — a match encouraged

by alcoholic medium and fellow boarder Saldia Caporale, who

greatly influences Anselmo. During a seance, Térence’s epileptic

brother Scipion steals 50,000 lire from Mathias’ room. Unable to

press charges because of his secret identity, Mathias secures

Adrienne’s promise not to marry Térence and returns to Miragno,

frightening and intimidating Romilde -– now married to Pomino, and

with a child by him — along with her mother and Maldagna, now

running for re-election as mayor. After putting his affairs in order

and visiting his ‘grave’, he returns to Rome and marries Adrienne.

It is one of the unfortunate consequences of historical short-

sightedness that the only work of Marcel L’Herbier now available

in this country is the dated Feu Mathias Pascal, while the extraordinary

L’Argent — made only three years later, but not really ‘discovered’

until 1968, by Noël Burch — should remain inaccessible. Checking

the standard film histories, one finds that at least one reason

for the earlier film’s reputation still remains at least partially

viable: as a vehicle for Ivan Mosjoukine, it amply serves — through

its arsenal of shifting stylistic strategies — as a showcase for his

versatile talents. And from a more academic standpoint, the movie

affords one the opportunity to see the first film performances by

Michel Simon (made up so heavily that he almost resembles

Catherine Hessling) and Pierre Batcheff (the principal character in

Un Chien Andalou), and the first work in Paris by Cavalcanti and

Lazare Meerson. Less enduring, alas, are most of the qualities that

originally gave the film some status as a literary adaptation. It was

the first of Pirandello’s works to be brought to the screen, and

L’Herbier still speaks with pride about the approving letter he

received from the author.) It is, to be sure, unusually faithful to the

novel’s plot: although Mathias Pascal’s first-person narration is

dropped along with several characters (such as his childhood tutor)

and incidents (such as his eye operation in Rome), a running time

of over three hours allows L’Herbier to retain a considerable amount

of the original’s detail, which location shooting in San Gimignano,

Rome and Monte Carlo (along with studio work in France) further

enhances. The problem is that Il Fu Mattia Pascal, far from being a

‘classic’ novel, isn’t even a very good one; a sprawling, meandering

account of a glib aristocrat demonstrating his apparent superiority to

everyone around him, it takes over three hundred pages to embellish

an anecdote that Hawthorne, in a story like Wakefield, could have

managed in ten — and it similarly takes the film a full ninety minutes

to arrive at the hero’s sudden decision to assume a new identity.

Much of the film’s exposition, moreover, is handled by titles which

the visuals mainly illustrate. But it should be acknowledged, in all

fairness,_ that many individual shots and sequences are brought off

with a distinctive visual flair: the first encounter of Romilde and

Mathias, passing on the street, uses natural lighting to split both

characters and screen into a striking division of white and black,

while the comparably expressionist village fête makes an affecting

use of smoke and silhouettes; and a graceful set of dissolves takes us

from this event straight into Mathias’ marriage, for once without

a title. Elsewhere, irises, superimpositions, slow-motion, blurred

focus and tilted angles are all put to expressive narrative use; and

if in each case these devices seem purely ‘localised’ rather than the

product of any consistent strategy, they resemble in this respect

Mosjoukine’s performance, which often appears to aim more at

isolated effects than at a harmonious creation. Oscillating between

the varying stances of a romantic lead, a sorrowful young Werther,

a hapless innocent and a cadaverous Nosferatu — and thereby

suggesting that he has more identities at his disposal than the

character he is playing — Mosjoukine is most inspired in scenes

which seem to reflect a Keaton influence, in the use of gadgets as

well as in his own demeanor: attaching a string to his daughter’s

cradle so that he can rock her by dancing a little jig while knotting

his tie or, in the film’s most appealing scene, enlisting the reluctant

aid of two kittens in ridding the ramshackle library where he works

of some bibliophile rodents that are nearly as big as the cats.

JONATHAN ROSENBAUM

Published on 06 Feb 1976 in Notes, by jrosenbaum

Comments Off