Disraeli

"Mr. George Arliss" was perhaps the most distinguished thespian of his generation; when he won the Best Actor Oscar for his Talkie portrayal of England's Jewish Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli (whom he had already incarnated in a 1921 Silent), he was the first British performer to be such honoured and, at 61, the oldest to receive this accolade! Arliss was another legend whom I had only ever read about in movie reference books; since the introduction of the internet, I have managed to acquire 10 of his films – but only got to one of them now as part of my Academy Awards marathon! For the record, the other movies I own featuring him are the following: THE GREEN GODDESS (1930; he competed against himself at the Oscars in this remake of a 1923 picture!), Alexander HAMILTON (1931), THE MAN WHO PLAYED GOD (1932), VOLTAIRE (1933), THE HOUSE OF ROTHSCHILD (his rosette in the "Halliwell Film-goer's Companion"), THE IRON DUKE (both 1934), CARDINAL RICHELIEU, THE TUNNEL (both 1935) and his swan-song, DOCTOR SYN (1937). Incidentally, in the past I had already watched John Gielgud in Thorold Dickinson's later Disraeli biopic THE PRIME MINISTER (1941) and Alec Guinness portrayed him in THE MUDLARK (1950)…

Anyway, I must admit that I expected this to be a chore to sit through – but was pleasantly surprised with the end result (which was also nominated for Best Picture, yet inevitably lost out to Lewis Milestone's ALL QUIET ON THE WESTERN FRONT {1930}). Though undeniably stilted in presentation and necessarily talky in approach, it nevertheless proved an interesting history lesson (detailing the tortuous purchase by the British Empire – against stiff Russian competition – of the Suez Canal) as well as, obviously, a valuable record of a famous characterization (Arliss coming across as alternately wily, fiery, devoted and sentimental).

The aged British PM is seen as unpopular: the film opens with a Hyde Park diatribe against him, followed by one in the Houses Of Parliament by political rival William Gladstone (himself a Downing Street occupant during numerous legislatures) – nor is he trusted by the country's economic leaders! However, Disraeli is himself a ruthless official, not above endangering his own position (knowingly employing Russian agents among his underlings only to feed them fake information!) and blackmailing the Governor of the Bank Of England (the latter considers the Egyptian deal "a harebrained scheme" and refuses to back it!). When the spies are finally routed and the transaction completed, he is received with full honours by the reclusive Queen Victoria (herself now dubbed "Empress Of India") – accompanied by his ailing wife (played by the star's real-life spouse Florence Arliss), financial allies (who are bestowed with a peerage!) and the film's obligatory romantic interest (supplied by Anthony Bushell and Joan Bennett).

One of George Arliss's best known stage roles was portraying the title role in the Louis N. Parker play Disraeli. This is not a biographical film per se, it fictionalizes Disraeli's acquiring the Suez Canal. It was quite the diplomatic coup d'etat in its day, but this version brings in a lovely lady spy in Doris Lloyd in the service Czarist Russia.

Throughout the 19th century it was a paradigm of British foreign policy that the Russians were constantly looking to undermine British interests in India. The same theme was found in Rudyard Kipling's Kim.

In this film Disraeli has an opportunity to acquire the canal from the Egyptians and the French company that built it which has financially gone belly up. Hidebound banker David Torrance of the Bank of England won't give him the money, he considers Disraeli a disreputable foreigner because of his Jewish ancestry. He goes to a private banker Harry Meyers (Rothschild)played by Ivan Simpson for the money.

A lot of games, financial and political, get played out before foxy old Benjamin Disraeli gains the canal for the United Kingdom. Dizzy proves quite up to the challenge at the same time worried about the health of his beloved wife Maryanne, played her by George Arliss's wife Florence.

There's also a small romantic subplot involving Disraeli's aide Anthony Bushell and young Joan Bennett. The couple are an attractive pair.

This was the second version of this story, Arliss had made a silent version in the early Twenties that was well received.

George Arliss won the third Academy Award for Best Actor given out with this performance. Though by today's standards some might consider it hammy, Arliss was of the Victorian classical school of acting and I for one appreciate the care he took in presenting one of his most acclaimed roles of the day.

Disraeli is dated and it's hardly history, but it is a fascinating performance nonetheless.

Disraeli (1929)

** (out of 4)

Creaky, early talkie won George Arliss the Best Actor Oscar but outside of his performance there's very little to recommend here. In the film he plays British prime minister Benjamin Disraeli who not only tries playing match maker (to Anthony Bushell and Joan Bennett) but also trying to cool the political climate in the country. Disraeli's main challenge comes when he tries to buy the Suez Canal as he's not prepared for the battle that will come. This film comes as a major disappointment to me especially after reading so many positive reviews. It seems the majority of people who viewed this film did enjoy it but I'm certainly not one of them. I did love the performance of Arliss who is the main reason to watch this. Apparently Arliss played this role several times on stage and even did a 1921 movie version, which is sadly now lost except for one reel. He certainly knows this role and feels very comfortable playing it and this comes across on the screen as he appears to just float from one scene to the next. Arliss is clearly very comfortable here and that easy-going nature really comes across well and he manages to make the character very well-rounded. Both Bushell and Bennett are charming in their roles and they look great together but I must admit that I found their relationship to be rather lacking and not at all interesting. Even worse, for me, was all the political stuff because of all talky everything was. I was growing real tired of the constant dialogue as it wasn't written very well and the only all blandness of the non-stop words. Even worse is that the film has a very stagy look that just brings the film to a complete stop.

Actually really like biographical films, although they do play fast and loose with the truth many are extremely well made, written and acted ('Amadeus' for example is one of my all time favourites). Benjamin Disraeli was a very fascinating if controversial historical figure. George Arliss was a fine actor, one of my favourite performances of his being 'The Man Who Played God'. Have always loved classic film and there are some great films from the 20s, with some good early talkies ('Applause).

'Disraeli' is definitely an interesting film, for the subject matter, to see whether Arliss' Oscar win and the screenplay and Best Picture nominations were deserved, to see what early talkies were like and to see a film portrayal of Disraeli. So historical interest. While it is easy to see why there are some that got a lot of value out of 'Disraeli', it does pain me to say that it didn't quite gel with me and can see why others don't care for it. As it is an easy film to criticise, even when judging it for the time where film-making was very different but a lot more interesting back then than what is seen here. A case of a lead performance that deserved a much better film.

The best thing about 'Disraeli' is Arliss, who is truly marvellous and that is an understatement. He is so charismatic with a magnetic presence that has a mix of understated and larger than life, succeeding in making Disraeli a complex and interesting person. Florence Arliss, his real life wife, is dignified and charming and their chemistry is lovely to watch. A beautiful looking Joan Bennett in an early role is also charming.

Some nice political intrigue is present, the script is at its best with Arliss' wryness the costumes are handsome and Arliss is made up very believably.

Having said that, the rest of the acting for my tastes was too wooden and histrionic. Particularly Anthony Bushell in the former category, who has a romantic subplot that is very flimsily written and dull. Visually, 'Disraeli' is too static and not a very good job at all is done opening up the action in a very claustrophobically shot film that gives the film a filmed stage play look, even by early talkie standards.

Will agree with those that find 'Disraeli' too talk heavy and that too much of it is not very engrossing, the flow is also pretty stilted. The pace can veer on dull, the political angle could have done with more tension. Of the Oscar nominations, only Arliss' (who won) for Best Actor was deserved. The other two were puzzling and not in the same league as the films that won in the categories.

Overall, watchable and interesting, and Arliss is so good, but didn't quite gel for me. 5/10

I was surprised to see this film at my local chain video shop. I couldn't believe that anyone would ever have made a film about such a character, who barely moves from his office. Fortunately, he's got a nice yard to roam around in. Not an action hero.

What you've got here is a play with snappy dialog brought to film with great stage actors. And that's not bad at all. The camera movement and sound are primitive (this is a 1929 film, after all) but you never lose interest. The filmmakers have wisely chosen to focus on one particularly pivotal incident in the history of the world: a transfer in ownership of the right to construct and maintain the Suez Canal. They focus on the key character in the drama: Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli. In the course of a few weeks when this drama takes place, we get to see what was appealing about this man, how he handled the prejudices against a Jew leading a country of Anglicans, and how his personal life was intertwined with his carrying out his mission.

I have no idea how much of this is true. I assume that the bare facts of the Suez Canal affair are accurate. And this film brings to life the intrigue and romance of the life of a man at the central of English political life at a time when British power reached its zenith.

A fine movie.