Skip to main content

The Prisoner of Zenda (1952)

Sunday, March 1, 2009

The Prisoner of Zenda. Feature film. (1952, 95 mins) IMDB

...A fascinating study in remaking a classic film....

T

he film is a remake of a 1937 film of the same name. A study of the two films is an interesting lesson in filmmaking.

The original film is based on a novel. I can't say anything about the adaptation. The second film is basically the same script but with different directors and actors. There are few changes between the first and second film. The dialogue is virtually identical. The scenes and even the direction is the same, but they aren't the same film. How is that possible? Three characters.

David Niven plays a small role as a junior advisor to the king in the first film and he stands out because he's David Niven. The same role exists in the second film with an actor I don't recognize and well, he seemed invisible.

Douglas Fairbanks, Jr. played Hentzau probably the only way he could with flamboyance, a laugh and over the top, but it was fun to watch. James Mason is an entirely different person and the performance is more menacing and devoid of humour. Both effective but I preferred Fairbanks even though I have nothing against Mason and have enjoyed his other performances.

Then there is the brother to the king who wants to be king. The minute Raymond Massey shows up on screen we feel the evil of the character and it continues until his final scene in the movie. The actor in this role in the second movie seemed invisible and at best a warm towel.

For the casting choices and acting alone, I argue the first version is a much better film, but not entirely. The sword fight at the end between Mason and Granger is one of the best in film. At least pre-CGI films. It's much better than what happened in the first film, but it's not enough to compensate for the other deficiencies.

In William Goldman's book WHAT LIE DID I TELL? he states that you have a chance if you have: a good script, the right director and it's cast properly. If those ingredients aren't in place at the start of production, then the film will surely fail. Having watched these films back to back, I can see what he means. Same script, same directing but different casting and they aren't the same films.

The rest of the casting works. Granger for Coleman. Kerr for Carroll. Louis Calhern for G. Audrey Smith. They all worked.

Mary Astor is believable in the first film and Jane Greer in the second, but each different. To me, Greer catches and hold your eye. She has an intriguing look with a sense of power and command within. Astor is more plain looking and vulnerable. The sense of desperation of the character is entirely believable. Greer works in this small role, but she deserved staring roles.

Posted 2009/03/01 at 17h57ET in Movie Commentary.

Labels

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

If Only We Could Agree

Monday, June 11, 2012 ... have you been accused of misspelling a word you know is correct ... S usanne O’Leary wrote an interesting article on her experience with the variations of the English language in different countries. You know the obvious ones like colour with or without a “u” but less obvious ones like travelled versus traveled. Growing up in Sweden she learnt English in school—the UK variation. In publishing her books, she read reviews where she was criticized for improper spelling. False accusations as it turns out. While I write tire and cozy, it’s not incorrect to write tyre or cosy. Same language. Both accepted. Just different. You can read her write-up here along with the numerous comments posted by readers. I found it interesting, but that’s me. As a Canadian I deal with this issue everyday. I feel her pain when she’s criticized for something based on ignorance. No fun. I was told by a boss that “data are” isn’t correct. It should be “data is.” Read...
2 comments
Read more

Day 109: Writing a Novel—The Deep Blue Hold

Sunday, March 6, 2017 Note: Unedited writings from my notebook for this novel. Square bracket items represent added comments. At 18:47 Office ... I barely remembered anything about this story ... H as it really been three months? I guess it has. I put it out of my mind [so much so] that I barely remembered anything about this story. Not even the title. [Unreal!!!!!!] I had the general premise and an ending—enough I thought for a novel. What I lacked was a determination and desire to want to write it. Why bother… I wasn’t enjoying the process and I had no reason to believe the result wouldn’t be anything more than what’s gone before—nothing. James Piper Kitchener, Ontario Post comments on facebook page. Follow me on twitter. Posted 2017/04/14 at 14h02ET in The Deep Blue Cage | Writing A Novel
Post a Comment
Read more

CRA & E-Filing

Tuesday, March 6, 2007 ... Online Tax Services Suspended by CRA ... I received an email press release from the Canada Revenue Agency late on Tuesday stating they were shutting down the computer that processed e-filed personal tax returns. For many tax preparers the announcement means they will have to file paper returns or wait for the system to come back on, but it could be a long wait. Until we can announce a business recovery date, the Agency will provide daily updates to the media on the steps we are taking. On the surface, e-filing a return makes sense because it is more efficient, but at present it only makes sense for simple returns. If you file a return beyond a T4 and an RRSP deduction, you can expect follow-up letters requesting original receipts. For accountants, this hassle means additional time—time that usually can't be recovered. As result, many accountants file paper returns for their benefit. What is required is a system that allows the recei...
Post a Comment
Read more