Leichtlebig

"Easy Virtue" is an early and impressive Hitchcock in which the master displays a range of innovative filmic devices (such as the way we learn about a marriage proposal by watching the eavesdropping hotel switchboard operator rather than by seeing the man or woman talking on the phone).

The story is based on a play by Noel Coward and (contrary to the other posted IMDB comment on the film) I believe the movie is excellent. The solo organ score on the videotape I watched was absolutely stunning.

The film tackles a range of issues relating to divorce that would become taboo after adoption of the Production Code in 1934. Our heroine Larita is married to a drunken brute. After he catches her almost (but not quite) being seduced by the artist who has been painting her picture, he brings suit for divorce. Adultery is the only ground for divorce in England at this time and we see a gripping trial scene in which the jury has to decide whether to believe Larita's denials. Of course, the jury can't see beyond its Victorian preconceptions (if she's alone with him all day, of course they've slept together) and it finds her guilty.

Now a disgraced woman of "easy virtue," Larita takes to the Riviera where she ensnares a rich young suitor (after he hits her in the eye with a tennis ball). Unfortunately, she doesn't tell him about her checkered past and naturally Larita's family hates her on sight.

This story takes on a range of highly relevant divorce issues. The film skillfully lampoons the absurdity of fault divorce and the need to try questions of adultery to a jury. It takes quite seriously the way that society treated a divorced woman as damaged goods. It attacks the sexual double standard with zeal and skewers the stuffy English aristocracy to great effect. After 1934, divorce didn't exist in the movies (except in comedies where the spouses remarry in the end) and the important legal and social issues raised by divorce and female sexuality were erased from the screen by the censors. Very few early films (silent or sound) ever dealt so candidly with the harsh realities of divorce; "Easy Virtue" compares favorably to the outstanding "One More River" (1934) in its straightforward and quite moving treatment of the issues.

In Alfred Hitchcock's Easy Virtue, a woman has some explaining to do when the family of her second husband finds out there was a first husband. That's because back in the day, divorced women were considered damaged goods, and upstanding families would steer well clear of such flighty harlots. Easy Virtue's tagline asks "Can she be blamed for a past she didn't create?" And the answer is yes, because she did create her past when she started making eyes at the man painting her portrait. But perhaps I am getting a little ahead of myself.

Larita Filton (Isabel Jeans) is married to an unnamed guy. Well, he probably has a name, but the movie doesn't tell us. Anyway, they're rich, and she's having her portrait done by a professional artist. One day the artist notices marks on Larita's wrist, and she mentions that her husband sometimes drinks too much. Thus a relationship is born, at least as far as they went in the 1920s, which meant it's possible Larita and the artist smooched once. Anyway, one fine day the husband comes home to find the two of them in an embrace. A gun is presented, and a shot is fired, and the artist dies. This is all told to us in flashback at the divorce trial, where the jury quite naturally finds in favor of the husband. Larita is shamed and shunned.

She finds herself chillaxing on the Mediterranean, and a chance encounter with a tennis ball leads Larita to meet John Whittaker (Robin Irvine), who's from a well-to-do family himself. They romance, yadda yadda, and soon they're wed. He brings her home to meet his parents and his two sisters for dinner. The stern matriarch is fairly sure she recognizes Larita, and eventually she pieces it together. Haughty hilarity ensues.

This is a silent film, obviously very early in The Master's career, and much more of a melodrama than a thriller with a twist. There's no twist, and because there are few sight gags one must rely on the intermittent title cards to follow the mouthed dialog. That's all well and good, but there was just too much predictability afoot, and the quality of the print did the movie no favors, either. That all makes Easy Virtue a curio in Hitch's long, long career, and little more.

While many have dismissed this silent film of Hitchcock as an insignificant work, I found this film anticipates the virtues of the later works of the director. Hitchcock often relied on strong stories/scripts/plays whether it was du Maurier or Ernest Lehman or Ben Hecht or Anthony Shaffer to make his cinema tick. In this film it was the brilliant playwright Noel Coward. Just as "Frenzy" (script of Shaffer) ends with the words "…you are missing your tie," the final words of "Easy Virtue" are the explosive "Shoot! There is nothing left to kill." The word "shoot" refers to the cameras of the paparazzi not guns.

Visually, Hitchcock would revert to the same scene in "Notorious", in "Torn Curtain" and even as a weapon of defense in "Rear Window." The underscoring of the irony of final scenes of Hitchcock films are interesting to note. Coward and Hitchcock were really sensitizing the viewer on the social perceptions of marriage and divorce. Coward and Hitchcock seem to ask us the connection between slandered reputation and "easy virtue." In "Blackmail" the jester (the painting) seemed to scoff at the so-called justice meted out by the law keepers in final sequence.

Visually the most poignant shot (repeated twice) in the film is the shot of the judge's wig from above his head as he looks up. The interiors of the sets seem remarkably similar to scenes from Russian (Eisenstein's "Ivan the Terrible") and German expressionist cinema. Who should be credited more for what the film offers—Coward or Hitchcock. Probably both, in equal measure.

I think Easy Virtue would have worked better if we wouldn't have known Larita's background until John's family discovered it. Seeing it all laid out at the beginning of the movie removes much of the suspense. And even at only 80 minutes, the simple story feels too drawn-out.

This silent Alfred Hitchcock drama gets decent mileage out of a rather simple story. Isabel Jeans stars as a young woman who, because of a messy divorce in her past, is unfairly considered a woman of "Easy Virtue", and she must struggle constantly against the ways that her past affects how she is perceived by others. This kind of drama was probably more popular and more familiar in previous eras, and many stories of the kind don't hold up very well now. This one does often show some signs of age, but it also has some of Hitchcock's creative touches that move it along and make it worth watching. One of the best is Hitchcock's treatment of Jeans responding to a marriage proposal - it's quite innovative, and a nice way to avoid the often banal treatments of romantic scenes.

This is nothing like the movies for which Hitchcock is usually remembered, and it's really not even among his best silent work. But it's not bad, and if not always compelling, it is sometimes interesting in its look at the characters' social attitudes and perspectives.