Kameliadamen
When I saw ”Camille”
last year for the first time I was very much put off by it. Frankly I was not
looking forward to see it again and it has been staring at me from the DVD
shelf for a while now.
In several
cases going back for a second viewing completely changed my view of a movie, so
I tried to convince myself to approach “Camille” with an open mind. Maybe subconsciously
I had just vilified this film over time and seeing it again would put the
picture right.
It was set
right, all right, but not to the benefit of the film. If anything I think it is
even worse than I remember. In fact the agony it was causing me required me to
chop it up in 20 minutes chunks to get through it. I think I am finally done
with “Camille”.
I am now left
with the task of rationalizing what it is that is so horrible about this film
and I find that it is not one essential item, but an entire horror cabinet of
issues. In no particular order I will try listing them below.
Of course
my impression may be colored by the fact that I am hardly the target group of
this film and it was both made and take place in ages of different values and
attitudes, but I have seen enough costume dramas to recognize that it is not just
that.
First of
all I do not like the story and the characters in it. We are to sympathize with
a courtesan (which is just an almost invisible step up from prostitute) whose
life objective it is to catch a wealthy client and make him marry her. To me
that sounds like a conning scheme.
In this
particularly case the courtesan (Greta Garbo as Marguerite Gautier) is an excessive
spender of sickly health and fickle loyalties so you may say that she has the
work cut out for her. Not an attractive card in the first place and add to that
the reputation of courtesans and we are basically talking “Pretty Woman”, 1847.
Nevertheless she gets two generous offers, one that can supply her wealth and
one that can supply her love and she manages to mess it all up and loose both.
I do not mind that it is a tragedy, but I am inclined to think it is a tragedy
that she lived long enough to cause the havoc she did. I doubt that was the
intention.
Her suitors
are not particularly likable, but at least I can sympathize with their
frustrations. Take Baron de Varville (Henry Daniell). I know he is an unloving
character, but he is surprisingly generous towards her, both economically and
in taking her back after repeatedly cheating on him. No wonder he is deeply
suspicious of her. The wonder is that he has not given her up entirely. Armand Duvall (Robert Taylor), as the second
suitor is called, is a starry eyed fool who is hanging his entire career and
life on the fickle whims of a courtesan. He may come about as a romantic hero,
but really, what is he doing in the realm of gold-digging courtesans? And with
a courtesan of such an excessive budget that he would never be able to afford
her. His father (Lionel Barrymore) was right. Gautier is ruin and destruction for
him, but he is obsessing like a moth around a flame, just waiting for the
inevitable burn.
The
courtesan environment is genuinely annoying. It is presented as being as gaudy
and posh as a Versaille court of the 18th century, yet it is played
out as a bunch of hillbillies in carnival costumes. Really, this looks more like
Texas than Paris mid-nineteenth century. I was struggling to find sympathetic
characters and failed.
Then we
have Greta Garbo. Oh, she is wonderful. I have seen lots of good stuff with
her, but this is not one of those. Why why why have they made a strong,
empowered woman like Garbo play a fickly and vain courtesan? It rings so hollow
that at times it is like watching a hippo in a bowling game. To hear all that
bull crap coming out of a person as strong, willful and intelligent as Garbo is
just painful. I have a box set with 6 of her films and all of them; “Queen
Christina”, “Anna Karenina”, “Ninotchka”, “Mata Hari” and “Anna Christie” features
a strong woman except for “Camille”. Just look at her for crying out loud. Even
in all her gauche and silk she looks like someone who could make the proudest
person whither and wimper and not NOT like a little silly girl who spends too
much money and cannot find out which of her suitors to pick. I know women’s situation
in mid-nineteen century was not particularly liberated but a Garbo character would
take action and be resourceful and not lay down to fade away out of heartbreak.
For that they should simply have found a different actress.
“Camille”
is a film of obvious manipulation. It creates the story with the sole purpose
to make the romantically inclined wail in heartbreak. A chic-flick characteristic
as I ever knew one. I am a sensitive type, I feel the pain of the characters,
but when it is as engineered as this it leaves me entirely cold. I may simply
be of the wrong gender, but I really cannot be moved by this. Instead I just
feel disgust with the manipulation and annoyance with characters that go out of
their way to cause romantic drama. I guess this is melodrama in its worst
meaning.
There was a
scene near the end I actually liked. Olympe (Lenore Ulric ), one of the courtesans,
enters a party in another one of the enormous and deeply impractical outfits
they keep wearing on every occasion in this film. However this time Gaston (Rex
O'Malley), calls out the ridiculousness of the dress with its bird and nest and
asks if anyone wants an omelet.
I would
prefer the omelet to spending time with these idiots.
You'll run into this basic plot again a few times. Fortunately for you, you'll have a long time between this stinkburger and the next time you see someone torn between two men while wasting away tragically and beautifully. Camille spends the film dying, but she always manages to look a hell of a lot like Garbo.
ReplyDeleteThen again, you and I have discussed this at length already.
I took a glance at your review of Camille and realized that we discussed exactly at the time I started my blog. A very special time for me.
DeleteWell, I am relieved that there are not too many of these films. This one has filled the quota for quite some time.
Back in the early 80s I saw a TV movie of the Camille story. It was the first thing I had ever seen Greta Scacchi in (she played Camille.) I remember being moved by it. Many years later I saw this Camille movie and I didn't feel it was even as good as that TV movie. Of course, I was decades older, which might have changed my perception. And even though the other was a TV movie, it was at a period of time when the networks were fighting back against loss of ratings by putting out high quality original movies. Yes, that's a far cry from today when throwing a lowest common denominator "reality" show on the air is their current strategy to get ratings.
ReplyDeleteI have not seen that version of Camille, but I am not surprised. There was a period where tv movies reached a standard comparable with big screen movies and certainly this old version is easy to top. I am not sure however I would go out of my way to look it up, but thanks for the tip.
DeleteYour review makes me understand exactly why you don't like this and has me scratching my head as to why I did. Maybe my love of opera makes me forgive an overblown plot. Also, I don't see Marguerite as torn between two men. I think she had definitely picked Gaumont and then sacrificed her own happiness when his father made her see that it would be his son's ruin.
ReplyDeleteWell, different strokes for different folks!
Yes, beauty is in the eye of the beholder and so are the quality of movies.
DeleteI had hoped that I would get a similar experience as what I had with My Man Godfrey, but alas, that was not to be.