Pikovaya dama

The supremely stylish yet chilling 1949 British adaptation of Aleksandr Pushkin's supernatural tale is not only the best-regarded version of this particular source, but among the finest genre outings to emerge from that country; with this in mind, I do not expect it to be surpassed by any other rendition I may care to check out! The film under review (snippets from which, found on the RusCiCo/Image DVD of another popular Russian horror story i.e. THE VIY {1967}, had first intrigued me some years back!), in fact, is one of two I intend including in the current Halloween challenge – the other, even less well-known, emanating from France in 1965. This Russian production, then, dates from the early days of cinema, so that the camera remains static throughout and the cast tends to gesticulate (apart from being heavily made-up, especially around the eyes, in order for their facial expression to better register on-screen!). Still, the end result is not ineffective for all that – after all, leading man Ivan Mozzhukhin (whom I was familiar with so far via THE LATE MATHIAS PASCAL {1926}) was a genuine star, comparable in his handsome looks and thespian skills to John Barrymore – where a sudden transition, within the same shot, between the past and the present proves its single most creative touch. Perhaps unsurprisingly, the devilish pact sealing the card-playing trick is absent here, relegating the fantasy elements to the Countess' ghostly visitation at the very end!; for the record, director Protazanov would later helm the seminal Sci-Fi epic AELITA, QUEEN OF MARS (1924) – which I do own a copy of but have yet to watch…

Described by Dostoevsky as 'the pinnacle of the art of the fantastic' Pushkin's short story of 1834 has never ceased to cast its spell and here we have the version directed by and starring the formidable duo of Yakov Protazanov and Ivan Mozzhukhin.

Although Yvgeny Slavinski's camera is static we are treated to dissolves, split screen and flashbacks whilst the sets are stupendous, courtesy of no less than three art directors graciously supplied by the king of designers Alexander Benois.

Pushkin describes his leading character Hermann as 'having the profile of Napoleon and the soul of Mephistopheles'. As luck would have it Mozzhukhin resembles the former and being a simply superlative actor, depicts the latter admirably. His is a performance of immense psychological depth. Also very taking is Vera Orlova as Lizaveta who is used shamelessly by Hermann to gain admittance to the home of the aged Countess so that he might learn the secret of the cards.

The eternal question is whether the image of the dead Countess we see in the closing scenes of the film is a ghost wreaking revenge or a figment of imagination in the mind of a man who has sown the seed of his own destruction. That of course is down to the individual viewer.

Despite an initially slow pace which tests one patience the film gradually gains momentum and becomes utterly gripping. It not only gives us in the person of Hermann a morality tale of the curse of obsessive greed but also depicts a hedonistic and privileged way of life that would soon be swept away by the tidal wave of revolution.

The Queen of Spades (1916)

** 1/2 (out of 4)

Alexander Pushkin's short story about a young man named German who learns about a Countess who knows the secret to cards to where she can win no matter what. German decides to try to court her and learn her secrets but soon death follows.

THE QUEEN OF SPADES is a film that was told several times during the silent era but the most famous version is probably the one from 1949. This Russian silent is certainly an impressive looking film as it features some nice cinematography as well as some nice performances. The highlight is certainly the sets, which look terrific and really make the film seem as if you're watching a big- budget picture.

With that said, this version lacks getting the viewer caught up in its story. It really did feel as if the director was more worried about the visual look instead the of the story and the end result is something nice to look at but the power of its story never really comes across. The film also doesn't come across as haunting as it should have as the ending is a bit rushed.

Still, there's no question that THE QUEEN OF SPADES is worth watching if your'e a fan of silent horror films. IT's certainly flawed but at the same time it's well-made and looks terrific.

This Yakov Protazanov movie is an excellent adaptation of Pushkin's classic short story, "The Queen of Spades", with a very good leading performance by Ivan Mozzhukhin and an impressive production for 1916. The story is told deliberately and with considerable detail, allowing the psychological impact to sink in fully, as well as following the developments and turns of the plot itself.

All of the cast is solid, giving carefully restrained performances that work well, but Mozzhukhin stands out as German. He uses his eyes, face, and careful gestures to communicate more than the most extravagant gestures could have done. Even his occasional stylized or exaggerated moments still seem to fit in with the increasing deterioration of his character's mind.

The photography, flashbacks, and special visual effects are quite good for its era, and the special effects are incorporated well into the story. There is one very imaginative sequence that uses a flashback and a jump cut, in the scene when German comes to confront the Countess in her room. The techniques help to flesh out the character of the old Countess and to add extra tension to this crucial scene.

The production as a whole is also of good quality, with detailed settings and good use of extras in the sequences that take place in public. At the time, it would have been quite difficult to improve on this adaptation of Pushkin's story.

Here's an interesting film from the days before tireless proles dominated the Russian screens; army officers in impeccable attire gamble and drink and tell stories, pampered aristocrats stroll and saunter about in upscale establishments in Paris, and the only hint of poverty is that the poor young maid is dissatisfied by having to serve the old countess.

It is important to appreciate the significance of this apart from the screen, I feel. These characters and their decadent, opulent world are months away from actually being swept away from life, as are the filmmakers and actors seen here. Both the people who inspired the characters and actors portraying them, a lot of them at least, would be forced to go on the trail and into exile in France or Germany, and for a lot of the same reasons.

And this is what our film is partially about. A complacent upper class who gambles away its fortunes because there is nothing else to pass the time with, whose biggest worry is how to keep the husband count from getting to find out, or how to steal the secret way of quickly making easy money. Of course, how a countess can be in the position to have so much money to idly lose on the turn of a card is strategically absent from the film.

The games of cards as fate left to chance, transient life where playing your cards in certain order does not ensure control of the outcome, and karmic retribution on the closing end of this cycle.

For the most part, this is ordinary stuff right down to the supernatural visitation of guilt, except perhaps for two things.

Ordinarily, the young army officer eager to learn the secret of the cards would be portrayed in ways that immediately signalled to the audience the right distance to keep from him and a karmic downfall in the works. Mozzhukhin portrays him instead as a blank slate of pensive introversion, a folded card waiting its turn and perhaps bluffing. Kuleshov would make a lot of this once Mozzhukhin had been swept away to France and Soviets had taken control of images to build reality - including Mozzhukhin's.

The other is that this is not theatric, even though it seems so at first glance. Tchaikovksy had adapted the same story for the opera, and we may presume this derives from that stage. The camera is static, yes, but notice some very cinematic framing going on - a shot of the secret being whispered in flashback cuts to match the present time telling of the story among the officers. Also notice a second-hand narrator of the story and later an unreliable mind with unsure footing in the world, both these we encounter again in the films of Epstein - who, no doubt, would have come into contact with the Russian emigres in Paris, himself one.

This is far from Proletkult's radical space for the eye, but as with Bauer, it has a certain stately finesse.which, no doubt, comes from a foot in the complacent life shown here.