Schloß im Mond

Without a doubt, this is a film that should be seen by more people as it was way ahead of its times! The film is helped by the magnificent direction of Rouben Mamoulian, who knew a thing, or two, about how to create movies that endured the passage of time. The film has the magnificent score by Rodgers and Hart, the leading geniuses of the American musical theater.

The picture is a joy to watch from the beginning. The opening sequence in Paris, as people go about their daily routine, ending with Maurice arriving at his own tailor shop is amazing. The story is pure fantasy, but it serves the movie well. The time where this movie was made had a different feel and there was an innocent air surrounding the magic the new talking pictures that were coming out in the early 30s.

The casting proves to be also excellent. Maurice Chevalier, who was an idol in France, made it big in America. He had a personality that put a good feeling to any character he played. Jeannette McDonald, the leading lady was a favorite of the movie going public and it's easy to see why she was adored.

Also a young and fresh Mirna Loy, joins Charles Ruggles and Charles Butterworth in the supporting roles.

This film should be included in any collection of the discriminating movie fan.

I have watched this movie in part several times, but caught it tonight on TCM or from my DVR of a recent showing. It is a special one, and was interested in checking out these magnificent sets created for it. They were wonderful.

Liked Chevalier in this particularly. I agree with the reviewer who finds Jeannette McDonald's singing a bit of a trial. I don't care for most opera type singing. Get ready for some corn here: Was reminded of something Andy Griffith said about opera singing (from a comic recording), "Some people say opera is just hollerin', and it is; but it's high class hollerin'." It comes across that way to me. That quote may offend the cinematic detail oriented enthusiasts of this film - sorry.

However, I have enjoyed a few old operettas, thinking of "Sweet Kitty Bellairs" from 1930 featuring Claudia Dell and Walter Pidgeon. Ms. Dell was easier on the ears than Ms. McDonald. Pidgeon's singing was pleasing, and I found the piece entertaining.

In watching C. Aubrey Smith in this, I thought for the umpteenth time whether he was born an old man. He is always ancient in every movie I have ever seen with him. Actually, his Hollywood films were done in his elderly years. Finally looked him up and found he was born in 1863. Wow. He did London stage, Broadway and came to Hollywood much later. He died in California at age 85.

This is a good film and has interest for its genre. It is probably my favorite Chevalier. It was odd seeing Charles Ruggles in this. They were talking about Myrna Loy during the intro to the movie, saying this film may have begun her being used in something other than the Oriental evil women or vamp types. Only a few people were making the decisions on casting back then in the studio system, and thankfully, they finally broke her out of that old mold and began to find out how engaging she was as a wife and later as a comedienne.

Good film.

This is an enchanting film, one of the best musicals of the decade. Maurice Chevalier and Jeanette MacDonald are incredibly appealing in a rich-girl-poor-boy musical romance. It's one of those rare films where the girl runs away from the palace to follow her true love and you *don't* think "wait a minute, you'll never survive out there", no, you want them to be together. The score is enchanting (the big hits being "Isn't it Romantic" and "Lover"), Chevalier is devastatingly attractive, and MacDonald is vulnerably appealing and completely without the annoying primness that marred her later films.

It's also a remarkably well made film for 1932, when most films were just getting used to sound and suffered from a horrible stiffness on the part of the actors and the camera. You'd think this movie was made ten years later, it's lively and sparkling, and directed with a smoothness and originality that's still amazing.

For what it is worth, here is a bit of "Americana". I found a letter from my father to my mother written on September 11, 1932 ,(nine years before they were married, by the way). In it he mentioned having gone to see this film. His review is as follows...

"I went to see Maurice Chevalier tonight in his latest, 'Love Me Tonight'. Say, I have more technique than that guy, any night. He is losing all he had, can I give him pointers?".

I had to correct some spellings errors in the quote, otherwise IMDb wouldn't accept it. Pity. That way it loses a bit of the flavor and intention of a "Quote"

I take it that my Dad liked the movie.

No, really -- I defy anyone to name a movie musical more exuberant, more creative, more romantic, melodic, hilarious, or escapist; not even "Singin' in the Rain" equals it. From opening shot (a rhythmic ballet-mechanique of Paris coming to life at dawn) to fade-out (a happy-ending finale that also parodies Eisenstein), it's bursting with ingenious ideas.

The pre-Code screenplay, rife with double entendres and social satire, is a princess-and-commoner love story written to the strengths of its two stars: Chevalier, never more charming, and MacDonald, never a subtler comedienne. With one foot in fantasy and the other in reality, it manages to sustain an otherworldly feeling even while grounded in the modern-day Paris of klaxons, tradesmen, and class consciousness. The supporting cast is phenomenal, with Myrna Loy as a man-hungry countess, C. Aubrey Smith doing his old-codger thing, Charles Butterworth priceless as a mild-mannered nobleman ("I fell flat on my flute!"), and Blanche Frederici, Ethel Griffies, and Elizabeth Patterson as a benign version of the Macbeth witches' trio.

All are wonderful, but the real muscle belongs to the director and the songwriters. Mamoulian's camera has a rhythm of its own and many tricks up its lens: note the fox-hunt sequence suddenly going into slow-motion; the Expressionist shadowplay in Chevalier's "Poor Apache" specialty; the sudden cuts in the "Sonofagun is Nothing But a Tailor" production number. As for the Rodgers and Hart score, it's simply the best they ever wrote for a film -- maybe the best anybody wrote for a film. The songs are unforgettable in themselves -- "Isn't It Romantic?", "Mimi," "Lover," etc. -- but, and here is where genius enters, they're superbly integrated and magnificently thought out. Note the famous "Isn't It Romantic" sequences, the camera roaming effortlessly through countless verses from tailor shop to taxi to field to gypsy camp to castle, finally linking the two leads subliminally, though their characters have never met. "A musical," Mamoulian once said, "must float." This sequence may float higher than any other in any musical.

Best of all, you can sense the unbridled enthusiasm the authors must have had for this project: Rodgers and Hart seem positively giddy with the possibilities of cinema, eager to defy time, place, and reason as was never possible for them onstage. What a pity that this magnificent movie isn't available on video, so that future generations can't easily rediscover its brilliance.