La manzana de la discordia

1st watched 8/17/2002 - 3 out of 10(Dir-Marc Allegret): Boring 2/3rd's historical drama starring Hedy Lamaar in all 3 parts with a production headed by her as well. The story revolves around a secret love of her narrating as she plays three different roles of great Queens of history(Saint Genevieve & Josephine of France) and mythology(Helen Queen of Troy). She's okay in her roles, but the picture appears more to be a way to show off her beauty & attempted talent rather than the history of these characters. Yes, she is beautiful and can act a little -- but for what other reason should anyone watch this movie? I can't think of any. The version I watched is supposedly a chopped down 97 minutes from an original release of 3 + hours(what a drag it would have been to see the original). Good thing they didn't transfer that to video.

Of the 3 stories, i thought Hedy's portrayal of Josephine was the best..she was the flirtatious vixen that she was known for and really loved Napolean, but had to withdraw from his love in order to marry 'the Austrian' who would bear him a son. Hedy looked gorgeous as usual and in Technicolor no less..She certainly looked the part of Helen, but the screen play was sort of empty...so whose fault is that...Hedy's? She didn't write those words. I read where this movie was being 'rushed' into production at the same time Warner Bros was also making a more expensive epic, "Helen of Troy', starring a french actor and an Italian actress whose names escape me..in fact, if you think this movie was bad, that one was worse. At least this one had Hedy to look at.

I absolutely adore Hedy Lamarr. When I first saw her face in a black and white movie on TV, way back, in the 1950's, I was transfixed by what I saw. Since then, no female in the history of movies, has surpassed her great beauty; Elizabeth Taylor and Ava Gardner came close. It never mattered that she was not a great actress. Elizabeth Taylor, as a Hollywood insider gained some acclaim as an actress, in some pretty impressive roles; but ultimately bit the dust, in films like 'Cleopatra', 'The Sandpiper', 'Boom', 'The Comedians', and many, many more. 'Amante di Paride, L'' was a mess of a film. Much of Hedy's money went into this film, but the film was doomed by its very premise; and certainly Hedy could never have done anything with such a horrible script, and stupid story! I felt more sad than anything, because I always thought Hedy did not end up with the right directors, or the best scripts. This movie was pleasing enough on the eyes; but otherwise an assault to the other senses. This is not the way I prefer to remember Hedy.

Badly edited from the original 180 minutes version called "L'amante di Paride", what seems to have survived is this 93-97 minute British version, in which the order of the stories was altered, the original modern-day framing sequence that opened the film was reduced, and the first segment ("L'amante di Paride", the Helen of Troy story) was almost dropped. According to Stephen Michael Shearer in his book on Hedy Lamarr, "Beautiful", Warner Brothers bought the rights for distribution in the United States to avoid its exhibition. The studio was producing Robert Wise's "Helen of Troy" and wanted no competition, so Lamarr's motion picture had no American release, in spite of what sources say (including IMDb). There seems to be a lot of confusion about this film (caused even by Lamarr's personal biography, where she mixes things and changes the names of the segments with other movies she made). From what I see (a few posters) it seemed as if in Italy they released two different movies: "L'amante di Paride" with the Greek gods' feast included, telling the Paris-Helen of Troy affair and the war; and as "I cavalieri dell'illusion" (The Knights of Illusion) the full Geneviève de Brabant tale, which even has a separate entry, here in IMDb. This is possible, considering that each segment ran about 60 minutes that could be rounded into a feature with the framing sequences (the modern-day wedding banquet, and the traveling theater company). Also different sources indicate that the music is by Nino Rota (and indeed, without knowing it was him, I recognized a few notes from his symphony used in "Il Gattopardo"), but that copy I saw credits Alessandro Cicognini as composer. Everybody is acting... not particularly well, to put it mildly, although Terence Morgan plays a villain in a convincing manner. It is recorded that Edgar G. Ulmer prepared the production and then directed the Geneviève de Brabant segment, and perhaps one of the framing sequences, and that (after Ulmer's departure) Marc Allégret did the Greek story, and probably the French chapter on Bonaparte and Josephine that ends the original version. It is also a co- production, not a sole project by Cino del Luca. American Victor Pahlen (who was Errol Flynn's partner in the film company they had in Cuba, and producer of Ulmer's "Pirates of Capri"), was in the production since the beginning, and Lamarr ended buying half of it. This is what I gathered from what I searched about the film, but some information may not be correct. It is true that it was a fiasco, but Hedy Lamarr got her money back, of course.